Kariuki & another (Suing on Behalf of Mpeketoni Plot Owners) v County Government of Lamu & 4 others (Environment and Land Petition E013 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 5031 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court in Malindi refused to stop Lamu County from collecting land rates in Mpeketoni, saying residents failed to prove the rates were unconstitutional.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicants established a prima facie case with a likelihood of success
No — the respondents demonstrated public notices in Taifa Leo and Daily Nation and public participation meetings, giving prima facie evidence of public participation in the 2023 valuation roll.
The court found that public notices were published and participation meetings were held, at which residents voiced objections, showing the public was engaged and allowed to give input. The applicants' own statements admitted such meetings took place. The argument that notices issued under a repealed Act were found misleading since the repeal only took effect on December 24, 2024.
Whether rates on freehold land are unconstitutional, applying Sheria Mtaani v Kajiado County Assembly
That decision was distinguished owing to the new regime under the National Rating Act, 2024, which took effect on December 24, 2024; the issue is reserved for the main petition.
The court held the Kajiado decision distinguishable because the National Rating Act, 2024 introduced a comprehensive framework for county rates, altering arrangements on rateability of freehold versus leasehold property. The impact of the new Act on the petition required determination at the main hearing rather than at the interlocutory stage.
Whether the applicants demonstrated prejudice or that the petition would be rendered nugatory absent conservatory orders
No — the applicants did not prove immediate, real and concrete danger; the court retains power to refund amounts levied or nullify the valuation roll if the petition succeeds.
The court found only general allegations without proof of specific damage; no claim was made that members could not afford the rates. The substratum of the petition would not be destroyed, and a favourable final outcome could be remedied by refunds or nullification of the valuation roll.
Whether public interest favours granting the conservatory orders
No — public interest weighed against suspending the valuation roll process, as it would hinder the County Government from discharging lawful functions under Article 209(3) and Section 132(1) of the Public Finance Management Act, 2012.
The court reasoned that halting rate collection would impede the county's lawful revenue functions. If petitioners ultimately prevail, amounts levied can be refunded, so the public interest lies in allowing implementation to continue pending full hearing.
Legal principles established
#- Conservatory orders bear a public-law connotation and are not tied to private-law injunction tests such as irreparable harm or high probability of success
- At the interlocutory stage the court must be careful not to make a final determination
- An applicant for conservatory orders must demonstrate a prima facie case with likelihood of success, prejudice, advancement of constitutional values, that the petition will not be rendered nugatory, and public interest
- A legislative Act enjoys a presumption of constitutionality unless proven otherwise
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated March 28, 2025 seeking conservatory orders is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 19, 20, 22, 23, 57 and 159(2)(d) of the Constitution of Kenya; Rules 19, 23 and 24 of the Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice and Procedure Rules, 2013
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kariuki & another (Suing on Behalf of Mpeketoni Plot Owners) v County Government of Lamu & 4 others (Environment and Land Petition E013 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 5031 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment (Notice of Motion dated March 28, 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5031/eng@2025-07-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.