Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedEnvironment & Land Case E003 of 2023· [2023] KEELC 16145 (KLR)

Dache v Odero

Environment and Land Court
6 March 2023
GOGMA Ongondo
372 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Homa Bay court froze all dealings with disputed land after the defendant failed to respond, protecting the property until the main case is decided.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By a Notice of Motion dated January 31, 2023, the plaintiff Peter Owuor Dache sought interim injunctions restraining the defendant, Akiri Ajungu Odero alias Odero Ajungu, from entering into, disposing of, remaining in possession of or otherwise dealing with land parcel number Kabuoch/kachieng/394, first pending the inter partes hearing of the application and then pending the hearing and determination of the main suit, together with costs. The respondent did not file a reply, raised no objection to the orders sought, and indicated the matter could be resolved by consent, with discussions ongoing between the parties. Counsel for the applicant, LK Obwanda, urged the court to grant prayer (c) of the application in those circumstances. GMA Ongondo J, guided by section 13(7)(a) of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2015 and the decision in Jan Bonde Nielsen v Nguruman Limited (2014) eKLR, found the application firm and merited. The court allowed the application in terms of prayer (c), issuing interim orders of injunction restraining the defendant, his agents, assigns or any person deriving authority from him from entering into, disposing of, remaining in possession of or otherwise dealing with the suit property pending the hearing and determination of the main suit. No express costs order was made despite costs having been sought.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether interim injunction should issue over suit property Kabuoch/kachieng/394

Holding

The application was allowed in terms of prayer (c), granting interim injunction pending hearing and determination of the main suit

Reasoning

The respondent did not reply to the application and raised no objection to the orders sought. Counsel for the applicant urged the court to grant prayer (c) given ongoing discussions between the parties. The court, guided by section 13(7)(a) of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2015 and the decision in Jan Bonde Nielsen v Nguruman Limited, found the application firm and merited and allowed it in terms of prayer (c).

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An unopposed injunction application may be allowed where it is merited, guided by section 13(7)(a) of the Environment and Land Court Act and Jan Bonde Nielsen v Nguruman Limited

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Interim orders of injunction issued restraining the defendant, his agents, assigns or anybody else deriving authority from him from entering into, disposing of, remaining in possession of and/or dealing with land parcel number Kabuoch/kachieng/394 pending the hearing and determination of the main suit

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Environment and Land Court Actsection 13(7)(a)

Cases cited (1)

  • Jan Bonde Nielsen v Nguruman Limited
    (2014) eKLR

    Guiding authority for the injunction application

Jurisdiction invoked
Section 13(7)(a) of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2015

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Dache v Odero", Case Analysis (2023). Environment & Land Case E003 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/16145/eng@2023-03-06

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