Kamau & 142 others v Kenya Railways Corporation & 4 others; Institute of Engineers of Kenya (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Petition E001 of 2025) (Environment and Land) [2025] KEELC 5475 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court allowed Kenya Railways to resume railway reconstruction near Maai Mahiu after dismissing residents' injunction and contempt applications.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Petitioners established a prima facie case for interlocutory injunction
No prima facie case was established; the application was overtaken by events upon issuance of the EIA licence, and no professional evidence rebutted the 1st Respondent's engineer
The court applied Giella v Cassman Brown. The basis of the injunction application - construction without an EIA licence - was overtaken by the 5th Respondent's licence of 9th May 2025, complaints about which lie with the National Environment Tribunal under Section 129 of EMCA. Further, the assertion that the reconstruction was 'outdated' was unsupported by any professional engineering evidence countering Eng. Shimrone Munga's deposition. Since the Giella conditions are sequential, failure of the first condition disposed of the application.
Whether the 1st and 2nd Respondents were in contempt of the orders of 26th March 2025
Contempt not proved; the Petitioners failed to discharge the heightened standard of proof
The court set out the Burchell requirements (terms of the order, knowledge, non-compliance) and the Mutitika v Baharini Farm standard, higher than balance of probabilities. The three photographs relied on did not show the site status before and after the orders, did not bear electronic time stamps, and did not establish that any activity shown was construction in breach. Securing machinery from rising debris did not amount to construction.
Whether the interim orders of 26th March 2025 should be vacated
Yes; having dismissed the injunction and contempt applications, the court exercised its discretion to review and set aside the interim orders
The court held that with the dismissal of the Petitioners' injunction application and the contempt application, nothing stood in the way of vacating the interim orders, which had automatically taken effect upon the dismissal of the injunction application. The 1st Respondent had complied with NEMA's improvement notice, obtained an EIA licence, and the restoration was in the public interest.
Legal principles established
#- The conditions for an interlocutory injunction under Giella v Cassman Brown are sequential; failure of the first (prima facie case) ends the enquiry
- The right of access to information is not absolute and the procedures in the Access to Information Act must be followed before recourse to court
- The standard of proof in contempt proceedings is higher than the balance of probabilities, almost but not exactly beyond reasonable doubt
- An EIA is the duty of the project proponent; NEMA's role is only to review and license
Court orders
#- 1.Dismissal of the Petitioners' application dated 3rd February 2025 seeking interlocutory injunctive orders
- 2.Dismissal of the Petitioners' application dated 23rd June 2025 seeking contempt proceedings against the 2nd Respondent
- 3.Allowance of the 1st Respondent's application dated 21st May 2025 seeking vacation and/or review of the interim orders of 26th March 2025 and 29th April 2025
- 4.No orders as to costs in all three applications
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 10, 23(3), 42 and 70 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010; Section 29 of the Environment and Land Court Act; Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kamau & 142 others v Kenya Railways Corporation & 4 others; Institute of Engineers of Kenya (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Petition E001 of 2025) (Environment and Land) [2025] KEELC 5475 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (Petition filed at Naivasha, with applications dated 3rd February 2025, 21st May 2025 and 23rd June 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5475/eng@2025-07-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.