U-Haul Vehicle Ltd v Kiambu Dandora Farmers Co. Ltd & 5 others (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 39 of 2019) [2022] KEELC 3108 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nairobi court found the Dandora police chief guilty of contempt for refusing to enforce a demolition order, ruling police security for court orders is free.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the OCS disobeyed the order of November 26, 2020
Contempt was proved; the non-payment excuse was unsupported and the plaintiff discharged the burden of proof
The order directed the Police to provide security to maintain law and order during court-sanctioned demolition, which is a public duty under Chapter 28 SSO, not private use under Chapter 57. No evidence showed the plaintiff was informed of any charges despite inquiries. The OCS never sought guidance from the court as Chapter 28(4) allowed.
Competence of affidavits sworn by the plaintiff's advocate
Impliedly upheld as competent; no finding was made against the advocate-deponent
The advocate deposed only to matters within his knowledge and not contentious; the OCS did not contest any fact in the affidavits. The court did not strike out the affidavits and proceeded to determine the application on their basis.
Applicable sanction for the contempt
Finding of contempt made but punishment deferred to allow the contemnor to purge it within 30 days
Applying the reluctance principle from Mutitika v Baharini Farm Ltd, and noting the current OCS was posted after the order and gave an explanation, the court exercised leniency while signalling that defiance of court orders carries consequences.
Legal principles established
#- There is a plain and unqualified obligation to obey court orders of competent jurisdiction, and disobedience constitutes contempt punishable by committal or attachment
- Personal service of an order with penal notice is no longer indispensable; knowledge of the order suffices for contempt
- Enforcement of a court order by the Police is a public duty and cannot be treated as chargeable private use of police
Court orders
#- 1.The Officer Commanding Dandora Police Station, Police Inspector Peterson Kunga is found to be in contempt of court for disobeying the order made on November 26, 2020
- 2.The officer is given thirty (30) days from notification by the plaintiff of its readiness to demolish the structures to purge his contempt by providing the plaintiff with security for the demolition
- 3.The officer and the plaintiff shall agree on the date and time of the demolition exercise within the 30-day period
- 4.The matter to be mentioned on September 21, 2022 to confirm if the contemnor has purged his contempt and for further orders
- 5.The costs of the application shall be in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent contempt jurisdiction of the High Court/Environment and Land Court to enforce and punish disobedience of its own orders (contempt of court proceedings in a pending suit)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "U-Haul Vehicle Ltd v Kiambu Dandora Farmers Co. Ltd & 5 others (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 39 of 2019) [2022] KEELC 3108 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in the ruling (interlocutory Notice of Motion dated January 26, 2021 within a suit filed February 12, 2019). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/3108/eng@2022-06-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.