Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedEnvironment and Land Case Civil Suit E239 of 2020· [2022] KEELC 15499 (KLR)

Limon Investments Company v Racecourse Primary School & 6 others

Environment and Land Court
15 December 2022
JOJudy Omange
825 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff, Limon Investments Company, filed a notice of motion dated July 12, 2022 in its suit against Racecourse Primary School and six other defendants, seeking an injunction restraining trespass and interference with plot LR 209/6860 in Nairobi, removal of a boundary wall and structures, cancellation of a survey map and deed plan, cancellation of title LR 209/16441, an official search, removal of a race course, and police supervision of implementation. The application was unopposed, as no defendant filed any documents. Applying the Giella v Cassman Brown principles, the court found the applicant had produced an unchallenged lease document establishing a prima facie case; damages might not adequately compensate if the status quo was disturbed, and the balance of convenience favoured protecting the status quo. However, the court declined to grant the far-reaching prayers (c) to (j) ex parte, holding that justice required hearing evidence from both parties before making drastic orders. The court issued a temporary injunction restraining the 3rd respondent from trespassing into, alienating, selling, transferring, trading in or interfering with plot LR 209/6860 pending the hearing and determination of the suit, deferred the other prayers to the main suit, and awarded the plaintiff the costs of the application. The ruling was delivered virtually by Judy Omange, J on December 15, 2022, with Mr Kamau appearing for the applicant and no appearance for the respondents.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether an interlocutory injunction should issue against the 3rd defendant

Holding

Temporary injunction granted restraining the 3rd respondent from interfering with plot LR 209/6860 pending determination of the suit

Reasoning

The applicant produced an unchallenged lease document over the suit property, establishing a prima facie case. Damages might not adequately compensate if the status quo is disturbed, and the balance of convenience favours protecting the status quo. However, the court declined to grant the other far-reaching prayers before hearing the defendants.

p. 2
02

Whether the remaining prayers (removal of structures, cancellation of title and survey documents, police supervision) could be granted ex parte

Holding

Refused at the interlocutory stage and deferred to the hearing of the main suit

Reasoning

The court noted the prayers were far-reaching and that it had not heard the defendants; the just determination of proceedings required hearing evidence from both parties before making drastic orders.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The principles for an interlocutory injunction are those in Giella v Cassman Brown: prima facie case, irreparable harm, balance of convenience
  • Drastic or far-reaching orders should not be made before hearing both parties

Court orders

#
  1. 1.A temporary order restraining the 3rd respondent from trespassing into, alienating, selling, transferring, trading and or interfering in any manner with the plaintiff's plot No LR 209/6860 situate within Nairobi County pending the hearing and determination of this suit
  2. 2.The other prayers to be determined during the hearing of the main suit
  3. 3.The plaintiff/applicant to have costs of the application

Authorities

#

Cases cited (1)

  • Giella v Cassman Brown

    Principles for grant of an interlocutory injunction: prima facie case, irreparable harm, balance of convenience

Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land within Nairobi County (interlocutory application in pending suit)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Limon Investments Company v Racecourse Primary School & 6 others", Case Analysis (2022). Environment and Land Case Civil Suit E239 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/15499/eng@2022-12-15

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.