Abdinedi v Odongo (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E024 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 4785 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kisumu court has temporarily stopped a landowner from evicting a woman who has occupied two Kisumu plots since 1993, pending full trial.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Applicant established a prima facie case with a probability of success
- 2.Whether the Applicant would suffer irreparable injury not compensable in damages
- 3.Where the balance of convenience lies
Key legal issues
#Whether the Applicant met the Giella test for a temporary injunction
Yes - a prima facie case with probability of success was established and the balance of convenience favoured preserving the status quo
The court accepted that the Applicant is in occupation of the suit lands, though whether by permission (as the Respondent contends) or as an adverse possessor since 1993 (as she contends) is left to trial. Given that unresolved factual contest and 32 years of occupation, preservation of the status quo by injunction was warranted pending full hearing.
Legal principles established
#- In order for an interlocutory injunction to issue, the applicant must establish a prima facie case with a probability of success, irreparable injury not adequately compensable in damages, and failing which the court decides on a balance of convenience
- At the interlocutory stage the court's duty is to preserve the demonstrated status quo pending hearing of the suit
Court orders
#- 1.An order of temporary injunction restraining the Respondent, her agents, family, servants and/or whomsoever jointly and severally from trespassing, transmitting, disposing of, or evicting the Applicant and her family from land parcel numbers Kisumu/Konya/3524 and 3525 pending hearing and determination of the suit
- 2.Costs to abide the main suit
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 40 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
in order for an order of interlocutory injunction to issue, the Applicant must establish a prima facie case with a probability of success, an interlocutory injunction will not normally be granted unless the Applicant would sufier irreparable injury which would not adequately be compensated in damages and that when the court is in doubt, it will decide the application on a balance of convenience
The duty of the court at this stage is to preserve the status quo which has been demonstrated to the court pending hearing and determination of the suit.
an order of temporary injunction is hereby issued restraining the Respondent, her agents, family, servants and/or whomsoever jointly and severally from trespassing, transmitting, disposing of, or evicting the Applicant and her family from land parcel numbers Kisumu/ Konya/3524 and 3525 pending hearing and determination of the suit
Costs to abide the main suit.
Issues in the judgment
#The court cites 'Order 40 Rule 1 Civil Procedure Act' in paragraph 11 but the motion was brought under Order 40 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules; the instrument is inconsistently labelled.
The recital of the motion (and relief) uses 'the Applicant' with masculine/neutral phrasing while the ruling orders refer to the Applicant as 'her', and the Respondent is described both as 'he' in the prayer and 'she' in the Replying Affidavit; gender references are inconsistent.
The case title, suit number and full coram are not stated in the excerpt; only the motion date and the judge's signature appear.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Abdinedi v Odongo (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E024 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 4785 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (Notice of Motion dated 24th April, 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4785/eng@2025-06-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.