Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNotice of Motion dated 10th January 2025 (Mombasa CMELC No. E014 of 2022)· [2025] KEELC 7060 (KLR)

Kigotho & another v Al-Amin & another (Civil Appeal E038 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 7060 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
16 October 2025
1,992 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Mombasa Environment and Land Court refused to protect Shanzu landowners pending their Court of Appeal appeal, ruling it lacked jurisdiction and the request duplicated a dismissed application.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By a Notice of Motion dated 10th January 2025, Anne Muthoni Kigotho and Penninah Njeru Gicheru, the joint registered proprietors of L.R. No. 6990/I/MN CR 21448 in Shanzu, Mombasa, sought an order of status quo and an injunction restraining Hassan Luku Al-Amin and Goso Ibrahim Bahija from dealing with the property pending an appeal to the Court of Appeal. The background was an ex-parte judgment for adverse possession obtained by the 1st Respondent in Mombasa CMELC No. E014 of 2022 on 12th June 2023, allegedly without service on the Appellants, after which the property was transferred to the 2nd Respondent for Kshs. 7,000,000. The Appellants' application to set aside that judgment was dismissed on 11th October 2024, and a subsequent application for stay was dismissed and the appeal struck out by Justice L. Naikuni on 16th December 2024. The Respondents opposed the present motion, the 2nd Respondent arguing res judicata and that a negative order incapable of being stayed was sought. Justice J.O. Olola held that the status quo prayer duplicated, word for word, a prayer already dismissed on 16th December 2024, and that revisiting it would amount to the court sitting on its own appeal. On the injunction, the court found it had no jurisdiction under Order 42 Rule 6(6), which empowers the court to grant a temporary injunction only when exercising appellate jurisdiction over a subordinate court's decision; an injunction pending appeal to the Court of Appeal is a matter for that court under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The motion was dismissed with costs to the 2nd Respondent, the court observing that the Appellants' recourse lies in the Court of Appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction to grant injunction pending appeal to the Court of Appeal under Order 42 Rule 6(6) of the Civil Procedure Rules

Holding

The court lacks jurisdiction; the rule applies only where the court is exercising appellate jurisdiction over a subordinate court's decision and the procedure for appealing from a subordinate court has been complied with. Once the intended appeal is to the Court of Appeal, that court may grant injunction under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules.

Reasoning

The court relied on the express wording of Order 42 Rule 6(6), which empowers the High Court to grant a temporary injunction only 'in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction' over subordinate court decisions. Counsel's own cited authorities (Ogumbo v Kyambo and Bartholomew Mwanyungu) confirmed that where the decision intended to be appealed is that of the ELC itself, the remedy lies in the Court of Appeal under Rule 5(2)(b).

p. 4
02

Whether a previously dismissed prayer for status quo can be re-litigated in a fresh application

Holding

No. The status quo prayer in the present motion was couched word for word with a prayer in the Motion dated 15th October 2024 which was dismissed on 16th December 2024, and the court could not revisit it.

Reasoning

The court found that Prayer (c) of the current motion replicated Prayer (d) of the earlier Motion dated 15th October 2024, which the same court (Justice L. Naikuni) had considered and dismissed on 16th December 2024. Re-granting it would amount to the court sitting on its own appeal. The applicants' proper recourse was identified as the Court of Appeal.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • The jurisdiction to grant an injunction pending appeal under Order 42 Rule 6(6) applies only where the High Court/ELC is exercising appellate jurisdiction over a decision of a subordinate court; it does not extend to injunctions pending appeals to the Court of Appeal
  • A court cannot revisit and re-grant a prayer it has already dismissed in a prior ruling, as this would amount to sitting on its own appeal

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 10th January 2025 is dismissed with costs to the 2nd Respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 Rule 6(6)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 40
  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 5(2)(b)
  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 75

Cases cited (2)

  • Ogumbo -vs- Kyambo & Another
    [Environment & Land Case 46 of 2019] (2023) KEELC 17959 (KLR)
  • Bartholomew Mwanyungu & 3 Others –vs- Florence Dean Karimi
    (2019) eKLR
On appeal from
Chief Magistrate's Court (ELC), Mombasa
Mombasa CMELC No. E014 of 2022
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 40 and Order 42 Rule 6(6) of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kigotho & another v Al-Amin & another (Civil Appeal E038 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 7060 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Notice of Motion dated 10th January 2025 (Mombasa CMELC No. E014 of 2022). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7060/eng@2025-10-16

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.