Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherNot stated in the judgment· [2024] KEELC 3421 (KLR)

Gitau v Kariuki & 3 others (Environment & Land Case E132 of 2024) [2024] KEELC 3421 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
23 April 2024
MMM.D. Mwangi
1,043 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court blocked the sale or transfer of disputed Thome land pending trial, but refused to evict the defendants holding titles.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By a Notice of Motion dated 2nd April 2024 brought under Order 40 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the Plaintiff sought an interim injunction restraining the 1st to 4th Defendants from trespassing on, transferring, wasting, developing or otherwise dealing with the suit property, Nrb/Block 110/553 at Thome in Nairobi, pending the hearing of the substantive suit. The Plaintiff claims legal and beneficial ownership, having purchased plot No. 478 (now Block 110/553) from Irene W. Njonjo under an agreement dated 15th January 1987; the 3rd Defendant company has in writing confirmed the Plaintiff as legal owner. The Plaintiff recently discovered that the 1st and 2nd Defendants hold separate title deeds and are in actual physical possession and have developed the property. The application was unopposed, no Defendant having responded despite confirmed service. M.D. Mwangi, J, held that at the interlocutory stage the court makes no conclusive findings but preserves the state of things. Relying on section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act and the doctrine of lis pendens as applied in Mawji v US International University and Ruth Kinyua v Patrick Thuita Gichure, the court found a status quo order, rather than a conventional injunction, appropriate. The court ordered that the Defendants should not transfer, sell or dispose of the suit property pending final determination; directed the Plaintiff to amend the plaint to join Consolidated Bank of Kenya Ltd, the chargee, as an Interested Party and serve it; and ordered costs of the application to be in the cause. Ruling delivered virtually in Nairobi on 23rd April 2024.

Key legal issues

#
01

Interim protection of suit property where defendants hold registered titles and are in possession

Holding

A status quo order restraining transfer, sale or disposal of the suit property is the appropriate interim preservation measure

Reasoning

The court noted the defendants hold titles and are in possession, so a conventional injunction would alter the position. Relying on section 13(7) of the ELC Act and the doctrine of lis pendens, as adopted in Mawji v US International University and Ruth Kinyua v Patrick Thuita Gichure, the court held it need only preserve the state of things pending trial, and ordered status quo.

p. 3
02

Joinder of a chargee with an interest in the suit property

Holding

Consolidated Bank of Kenya Ltd, in whose favour the suit property is charged, should be joined as an Interested Party

Reasoning

From the exhibits the court observed the suit property is charged to Consolidated Bank of Kenya Ltd. Since the bank's interest would be affected, the court directed the plaintiff to amend the plaint to include the bank as an Interested Party and serve it with all pleadings.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The Environment and Land Court may grant interim preservation orders under section 13(7) of the ELC Act to preserve the substratum of the suit pending final determination
  • In an interlocutory application the court makes no conclusive findings but only preserves the state of things pending final determination

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order of status quo, directing that the Defendants should not transfer, sell and/or dispose of the suit property Nrb/Block 110/553 situated at Thome within Nairobi City County pending the final determination of the case
  2. 2.The Plaintiff to amend his plaint and include Consolidated Bank of Kenya Ltd as an Interested Party and thereafter serve it with all pleadings
  3. 3.Costs of the application to be in the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 40
  • Environment and Land Court ActSection 13(7)
  • Judicature Act, Cap 8 Laws of KenyaSection 3(1)
  • Indian Transfer of Property Actrepealed

Cases cited (2)

  • Mawji v US International University & another
    (1976) KLR 185
  • Ruth Kinyua v Patrick Thuita Gichure & Another
    (2015) eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act; Order 40 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Gitau v Kariuki & 3 others (Environment & Land Case E132 of 2024) [2024] KEELC 3421 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/3421/eng@2024-04-23

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