Lipton Teas and Infusions Kenya Plc v Mokal Investments Limited & 15 others (Environment and Land Case E014 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 7812 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused a second injunction over the same land and dismissed both sides' procedural challenges, telling everyone to go back to the Court of Appeal.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Preliminary Objection (res judicata and sub judice) was merited
Dismissed. Res judicata cannot lie because the 15th June 2023 ruling is under appeal and thus not finally decided; and the suit is not sub judice since only an interlocutory ruling is on appeal while the suit remains pending before this Court.
Relying on Section 7 and Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act and Supreme Court pronouncements on res judicata and sub judice, the Court held that the appeal against the 15th June 2023 ruling means the 'thing' has not been decided. A contrary finding would create an absurdity if the Court of Appeal later granted the injunction. The sub judice rule does not apply where only an interlocutory ruling is appealed and the suit itself is still pending before the trial court.
Whether a temporary injunction should issue over LR 9932/2, LR 9932/7 and LR 9932/8-22
Refused. The Court had already declined an injunction over the same parcel (whatever its description) on 15th June 2023, that order is on record and under appeal, and the Court of Appeal has already issued subsisting injunction orders protecting LR 9932/2.
Although the parties to the instant application differ (the 3rd to 16th Defendants did not participate in the former application) and the parcels are described differently, the Court found they relate to the same land. Granting a fresh injunction would duplicate the subsisting Court of Appeal orders; a party desiring orders that expressly mention LR 9932/2, 9932/7 and 9932/8-22 should seek review from the court that issued those orders. The Court also noted the multiplicity of applications and restricted further filings to those with leave.
Costs of the application and the Preliminary Objection
Costs follow the event under Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act; both the application and the preliminary objection were dismissed with costs.
Applying the general rule that a successful party should ordinarily be awarded costs unless the court directs otherwise for good reason, the Court awarded costs on both the dismissed application and the dismissed preliminary objection, there being no reason to depart from that rule.
Legal principles established
#- Res judicata cannot be made out where the ruling relied upon is itself the subject of a pending appeal, because the 'thing' (the merits of the former ruling) has not been finally decided
- A suit is not sub judice merely because an interlocutory ruling in it is on appeal; the suit itself remains pending before the trial court
- Once the Court has declined injunctive relief over a parcel of land, it will not entertain a fresh injunction application over the same parcel under a different description; review lies with the court that issued the subsisting orders
- A preliminary objection founded on res judicata is procedurally improper because it requires examination of pleadings, though a court may make an exception where the relevant rulings are on the record
Court orders
#- 1.The Plaintiff/Applicant's application dated 13th January 2025 is dismissed with costs
- 2.The 3rd-16th Defendants/Respondents Preliminary Objection dated 17th January 2025 is dismissed with costs
- 3.No more applications shall be filed in this matter without leave of Court
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 40 & 159(2) of the Constitution of Kenya; Sections 1A, 1B, 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act; Order 40 Rule 1 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Lipton Teas and Infusions Kenya Plc v Mokal Investments Limited & 15 others (Environment and Land Case E014 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 7812 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (suit filed 13th October 2022; related: Kericho ELC Miscellaneous Civil Application No. E023 of 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7812/eng@2025-11-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.