Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in the judgment· [2025] KEELC 7503 (KLR)

Mangi & 6 others v Noor (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E003 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 7503 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
4 November 2025
MNMwangi Njoroge
429 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The court dismissed a contempt and demolition application simply because neither side filed the required written submissions on time.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Malindi (Mwangi Njoroge, Judge) concerned a Chamber Summons application dated 4th October 2024 in which the Plaintiff, Charo Karisa Mangi, sought a warrant of arrest against the Respondent to show cause why he should not be committed to civil jail for disobeying an injunction order issued on 13th March 2024, and a mandatory injunction directing the Respondent to bring down a structure allegedly constructed on the suit property in breach of that order. The application was supported by an affidavit of Charo Karisa Mangi deposing that the order had been served on the Respondent, who nonetheless continued to develop the suit property. The Respondent opposed the application through a replying affidavit sworn on 28th February 2025, denying service of the order and asserting that the house under construction belonged to one Zulekha Mohamed Shekhan, who had purchased a portion of the suit property on 11th June 2020, before the suit was filed. He also deposed that he had never been to the suit property since the order issued and termed the application an abuse of court process. On 9th June 2025 the Court directed that the application be canvassed by way of written submissions to be filed within twenty-eight days. A perusal of the court record on CTS showed no submissions on record by either party. For want of compliance with the Court's directions, the Court dismissed the application dated 4th October 2024 for want of prosecution. The substantive issues of contempt and mandatory injunction were therefore not determined, and the underlying suit remains pending.

Key legal issues

#
01

Effect of failure to file submissions as directed

Holding

The application was dismissed for want of prosecution because no submissions were on record by either party despite directions of 9th June 2025

Reasoning

The Court directed on 9th June 2025 that the application be canvassed by written submissions to be filed within twenty-eight days. At the time of preparing the ruling, the record on CTS showed no submissions by either party. The Court treated the non-compliance as want of prosecution and dismissed the application rather than determining the contempt and mandatory injunction issues on the affidavits.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A party who fails to comply with directions to file submissions risks dismissal of the application for want of prosecution

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Application dated 4th October 2024 is dismissed for want of prosecution
Jurisdiction invoked
Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court (injunctive and contempt-related orders sought in a pending suit); no specific provision invoked in the ruling

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mangi & 6 others v Noor (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E003 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 7503 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7503/eng@2025-11-04

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