Registered Trustees of Catholic Diocese of Nyahururu v County Government of Nyandarua & another (Environment and Land Case E003 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 5367 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether a prima facie case with a probability of success was established
The Plaintiff established a prima facie case: evidence of 1982 allotment, payment of allotment fees and long possession without objection.
The court found prima facie evidence that the Director of Settlement allocated the suit property to the Plaintiff in 1982 and acknowledged payment of allotment fees. There was sufficient evidence of possession, including operation of a dispensary, and no objection by the 1st Defendant or its predecessor. A letter dated 24.02.2005 from the Ministry of Lands and Housing confirmed the allocation due to permanent improvements, satisfying the first Giella principle.
Whether irreparable harm and the balance of convenience favoured interim relief
The services rendered on the property are not capable of monetary compensation; in any event the balance of convenience favours the Plaintiff as long-time possessor.
The court held that the nature of services rendered by the Plaintiff (a dispensary) could not be adequately compensated in damages. Even if in doubt on irreparable harm, the balance of convenience favoured the Plaintiff, who had been in possession for a long time and would suffer greater hardship without the injunction than the 1st Defendant would with it.
Whether an order of inhibition should issue
An order of inhibition was granted to preserve the disputed property pending full trial.
Ownership of the suit property is disputed and can only be resolved at a full hearing. Having found a prima facie case with probability of success, and applying Shivabhai Patel v Manibhai Patel on the court's duty to preserve disputed property, the court found an inhibition appropriate to prevent dealings with the land pending trial.
Legal principles established
#- Costs follow the event and a successful party should ordinarily be awarded costs unless the court, for good reason, directs otherwise.
- It is the duty of the court to preserve disputed property pending resolution of the dispute.
Court orders
#- 1.Temporary injunction restraining the 1st Defendant from entering, trespassing, or in any way interfering with the Plaintiff's possession of the suit property formerly known as Ex-Debruins Farm House – Passenga Township and now registered as Nyairoko Township/394 pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
- 2.Order of inhibition preventing any dealings with the parcel of land known as Nyairoko Township/394 pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
- 3.Costs of the application shall be in the cause.
- 4.Mention on 14.10.2024 for pre-trial directions.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction over land disputes; interlocutory application under Order 40 rules 1, 2, 4 & 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 and Sections 1A, 1B & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap. 21)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Registered Trustees of Catholic Diocese of Nyahururu v County Government of Nyandarua & another (Environment and Land Case E003 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 5367 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/5367/eng@2024-07-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.