Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in judgment· [2024] KEELC 586 (KLR)

Charles (Legal representative of the Estate of the Late Charles Gichoga (Deceased) v M’Mbijiwe (Sued as the legal representative of the Estate of Rosalia Andea (Deceased) (Environment and Land Case 63 of 2015) [2024] KEELC 586 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
7 February 2024
CNCK NZILI
204 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

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court lifted 2015 land inhibition orders because the case was decided, freeing the property for normal transactions.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This short ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Meru, delivered by CK Nzili, J on 7 February 2024, determined an application to lift inhibition orders placed on LR No. Nkuene/Kithunguri/340 by orders of 30 July 2015. The applicant, the plaintiff in the suit, explained that the inhibition orders had been imposed to preserve the suit property pending determination of the suit. Following that determination, the applicant argued that the orders should be lifted to pave the way for implementation of the court's decision. The court reasoned that section 70 of the Land Registration Act empowers the court to impose inhibition orders restricting transactions over land until further orders or the occurrence of an event, citing Julius Nturibi Rukaria vs Mary Ncekei Kirianki and another (2021) eKLR. Since the event envisaged in the order - determination of the suit - had occurred, the preservation orders were no longer necessary to effectuate the decree. The respondent filed no objection to the application. The judge accordingly allowed the application and lifted the inhibition orders, with no order as to costs. The ruling was delivered virtually via Microsoft Teams/Open Court at Meru, with Ringera appearing for the plaintiff and Miss Mugo for the defendant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether inhibition orders should be lifted after the suit has been determined

Holding

The application was allowed unopposed because the event envisaged by the inhibition order had occurred upon determination of the suit, and the orders were no longer necessary to effectuate the decree.

Reasoning

Inhibition orders under section 70 of the Land Registration Act are preservation measures intended to subsist until further orders or a specified event. Here the suit had been determined, so the purpose of preserving the suit property had been served. The respondent filed no objection. The court therefore lifted the inhibition to enable implementation of the decree, with no order as to costs.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • Section 70 of the Land Registration Act grants the court power to impose inhibition orders restricting transactions over land until further orders or the occurrence of an event; where the envisaged event has occurred, the orders may be lifted.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The inhibition orders placed on LR No. Nkuene/Kithunguri/340 on 30.7.2015 are lifted
  2. 2.No order as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 70 of the Land Registration Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Charles (Legal representative of the Estate of the Late Charles Gichoga (Deceased) v M’Mbijiwe (Sued as the legal representative of the Estate of Rosalia Andea (Deceased) (Environment and Land Case 63 of 2015) [2024] KEELC 586 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/586/eng@2024-02-07

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