Seroney & 5 others v County Government of Nandi (Environment & Land Case E017 of 2024) [2024] KEELC 6922 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court in Kapsabet stopped the Nandi County Government from evicting residents and businesses from six Kapsabet land parcels earmarked for housing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Applicants established a prima facie case for a temporary injunction
Yes - certificates of lease and official searches exhibited without any response established prima facie case under Section 26 of the Land Registration Act.
The Applicants exhibited certificates of lease and corresponding official searches for each suit parcel, which under Section 26 of the Land Registration Act are prima facie evidence of proprietorship. No grounds of opposition, replying affidavit or defence was filed, so the facts were uncontroverted and nothing challenged the titles. The rights of proprietors under Sections 24 and 25 therefore attached to the Applicants at this interlocutory stage.
Whether irreparable harm and balance of convenience favoured the Applicants
Yes - the Applicants live on and carry on business on the premises and would suffer irreparably if the eviction notice was effected.
The supporting affidavit deponed that the Applicants occupy the premises and/or carry on business there, with photographs exhibited showing possession. Eviction to make way for affordable housing units would cause them irreparable loss, and the balance of convenience tilts in their favour since they are in occupation.
Whether an injunction can issue against a County Government
Yes - case law holds that neither the County Governments Act nor the Government Proceedings Act prohibits injunctions against County Governments.
The Court raised the question sua sponte and invited submissions. Counsel cited decisions of courts faced with the same predicament which held that injunctions against County Governments are not prohibited by the County Governments Act or the Government Proceedings Act. The Court was persuaded by those reasonings.
Legal principles established
#- A certificate of title/lease is prima facie evidence of proprietorship, rebuttable only on grounds of fraud, mispresentation, illegality, unprocedural acquisition or corrupt scheme.
- The burden of proof on a plaintiff is not lessened where a suit proceeds undefended by formal proof.
- Injunctions against County Governments are not prohibited by the County Governments Act or the Government Proceedings Act.
Court orders
#- 1.Temporary injunction restraining the Defendant/Respondent, its agents, servants, employees and assigns from encroaching on and/or evicting the Plaintiffs/Applicants from Kapsabet Municipality/390, 391, 403, 405, 441 and 416
- 2.Costs of the application to be in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land in Kapsabet Municipality (interlocutory application within a pending suit)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Seroney & 5 others v County Government of Nandi (Environment & Land Case E017 of 2024) [2024] KEELC 6922 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment text. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/6922/eng@2024-10-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.