Mjomba v Mwanjala & 4 others (Environment and Land Appeal E001 of 2024) (Environment and Land) [2024] KEELC 5071 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court in Voi ordered both sides of a 3.5-acre land dispute to keep things exactly as they are until the main case is heard.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the trial court erred in striking out the 4th Respondent from the suit
No - the 4th Respondent had vacated the suit property and had no subsisting interest, so her retention served no useful purpose
The 4th Respondent bought the land from Brian Mwabora Kinoi who was charged with obtaining money by false pretences and refunded her Kshs. 220,000/= in the presence of the DCI, after which she left the property. There was no evidence of any transaction or engagement between her and the Appellant, nor of any subsisting interest in the suit property, so the trial court was justified in striking her out.
Whether the trial court erred in declining to grant injunctive and status quo orders
Partly - while the refusal of the injunction involved an exercise of discretion not lightly interfered with, an order of status quo was warranted in the interests of justice given the competing occupations
Interference with discretionary decisions requires one of the established grounds, none of which was established for the injunction. However, applying Paragraph 32 of the ELC Practice Directions, and since the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th Respondents admitted occupation and construction, fairness required maintenance of status quo pending the hearing of the suit.
Legal principles established
#- A first appellate court has power to review the facts and evidence and draw its own conclusions
- An appellate court will not interfere with a discretionary decision unless it is shown the court misdirected itself in law, misapprehended the facts, took into account irrelevant or failed to take into account relevant considerations, or the decision is plainly wrong
- Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Code empowers the court to strike out the name of a party improperly joined or to join a person necessary for the effectual and complete adjudication of the suit
Court orders
#- 1.Status quo order issued in respect to the unsurveyed piece of land measuring approximately 3.5 acres forming part of Sagalla/Kishamba 'B'/1 pending hearing and determination of the suit
- 2.No transactions, transfers of proprietary interest or construction in respect of the suit property pending hearing and determination of the suit
- 3.No eviction of either party from the suit property pending hearing and determination of the suit
- 4.Each party to bear own costs of the Appeal and costs of the Appellant's application dated 30th September 2021
- 5.Trial court file returned to the subordinate court for hearing and determination of the pending suit
- On appeal from
- Voi Principal Magistrate's Court (ELC Civil Case No. E047 of 2021)
- E047 of 2021
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction under the Environment and Land Court Act over appeals from the subordinate court
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mjomba v Mwanjala & 4 others (Environment and Land Appeal E001 of 2024) (Environment and Land) [2024] KEELC 5071 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). ELC Appeal (Voi Environment and Land Court appeal from Voi PMCC ELC Civil Case No. E047 of 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/5071/eng@2024-07-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.