Losokwan Camp Limited v Maasa Mara Lemek Landowners Conservancy Limited & another (Land Case E013 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 933 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court confirmed it can punish people for disobeying court orders even if they weren't named in the original case, provided they knew about the order.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the court has jurisdiction to hear a contempt application against non-parties
Yes - Sections 63(c) of the Civil Procedure Act, Section 29 of the ELC Act and Order 40 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules do not restrict contempt powers to parties to the suit.
The court noted that Section 63(c) of the Civil Procedure Act permits orders against persons who disobey court orders and does not limit them to parties. Section 29 of the ELC Act likewise penalises any person who disobeys a court order without specifying party status. Following Jedrom Buildings, the court held any person with knowledge of the order may be cited for contempt. Knowledge of the order is the key fact to be proved by the plaintiff in the main application.
Whether the court has jurisdiction to hear an application for joinder of parties in a contempt application
Yes - the court has jurisdiction, and Order 1 Rule 10(1) confers a discretionary power to add parties at any stage.
Since any person, whether a party or not, can be cited for contempt, the court necessarily has jurisdiction to hear an application for joinder of non-parties to the contempt proceedings. Order 1 Rule 10(1) grants a discretion to add or substitute parties where necessary for the determination of the real matter in dispute. The court cautioned that such an application is not automatically allowed; the applicant must avail sufficient evidence and the discretion must be exercised judiciously.
Whether the Notice of Preliminary Objection was a proper preliminary objection on a pure point of law
Yes - the issues of jurisdiction and competence are pure points of law requiring no ascertainment of facts.
Applying Mukisa Biscuits, Oraro v Mbogo, Quick Enterprises and Nitin Properties, the court confirmed that a preliminary objection must rest on pure points of law assuming the other side's facts. Since the objections challenged jurisdiction and the competence of the application, they could be determined without ascertaining facts, and thus fitted the description of a true preliminary objection.
Legal principles established
#- The Court has jurisdiction to hear a contempt application against persons who are not parties to the suit, provided the applicant proves the person had knowledge of the court order.
- Order 1 Rule 10(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules grants the court discretion to add or substitute parties at any stage of the proceedings.
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 16th December 2024 is dismissed entirely
- 2.Costs of the Preliminary Objection awarded to the Plaintiff
- 3.The Notice of Motion Application dated 4th November 2024 to be set down for hearing expeditiously and determined on merit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 63(c) and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, Section 29 of the Environment and Land Court Act, and Order 40 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Losokwan Camp Limited v Maasa Mara Lemek Landowners Conservancy Limited & another (Land Case E013 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 933 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (ELC suit at Narok). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/933/eng@2025-02-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.