Green Square Limited & another v Koech & 5 others (Environment & Land Case 66 of 2014) [2024] KEELC 1670 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The court dismissed a contempt application because the applicant could not prove the respondents actually knew about the court orders they allegedly disobeyed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Respondents/Contemnors were in contempt of the orders of 29th October 2015
No contempt was established: apart from the plaintiffs' counsel, the contemnors were neither parties to the proceedings nor present at the site, and there was no evidence of service of or knowledge of the orders
The court reviewed the proceedings of 29th October 2015 and found that the contemnors were not parties to the suit at that date and only sought joinder after being cited for contempt. Nothing was exhibited to show service of or knowledge of the orders. Knowledge being an essential ingredient of civil contempt, the contempt application could not succeed.
Whether the contempt application was an abuse of the court process
Yes - the application was made in bad faith, seeking a determination on a non-existent cause of action, the suit property having been attached, subdivided and sold by the EACC in separate proceedings
The suit property, Kericho Municipality Block 4/2, had been attached, subdivided and sold pursuant to a partial consent judgment of Ksh. 200,000,000 in ACEC proceedings, and the Court of Appeal had dismissed the applicant's attempt to halt execution. The applicant, aware of this, sought to mislead the court into determining a non-existent cause of action, occasioning miscarriage of justice.
Legal principles established
#- To succeed in civil contempt proceedings an applicant must prove the terms of the order, knowledge of those terms by the respondent, and failure by the respondent to comply
- A court order is binding on the party against whom it is addressed and remains valid and to be complied with until set aside
- The power to commit a person to jail for contempt must be exercised with utmost care and only as a last resort, requiring proof of wilful conduct
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 26th March 2019 is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application to the Respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 162(1) and 162(2)(b) of the Constitution; Section 5 of the Judicature Act (Cap. 8); Section 14 of the Environment and Land Court Act No. 19 of 2011; Sections 3A and 63 of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap. 21)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Green Square Limited & another v Koech & 5 others (Environment & Land Case 66 of 2014) [2024] KEELC 1670 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Notice of Motion dated 26th March 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/1670/eng@2024-04-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.