Ibrahim & 2 others v Cabinet Secretary for Interior & Coordination of National Government & 4 others (Environment and Land Constitutional Petition E091 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 6 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nairobi court refused to stop evictions in Mukuru Kwa Njenga, ruling that a public-interest project outweighed the residents' claim.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.whether conservatory orders should issue restraining the Respondents from evicting the Petitioners from land known as LR No. 209/14009 – SEPU Area of Mukuru Kwa Njenga, pending the hearing and determination of the Petition
Key legal issues
#Whether conservatory orders should issue restraining eviction/demolition pending hearing of the Petition
No; the Petitioners failed to demonstrate a prima facie case and the public-interest project outweighs their interest
Applying the Munya test, the court found the three Petitioners did not adequately demonstrate a prima facie case. They claimed to represent other residents without any list of such persons, admitted public engagement occurred, and produced a notice dated November 2024 over a year old without showing they had been evicted. Following Multiple Hauliers, the import of the public project outweighed the Petitioners' private interest, and the interim reliefs would paralyze the project.
Legal principles established
#- Conservatory orders are public-law orders granted on the inherent merit of a case, bearing in mind public interest and constitutional values, not private-law irreparable harm considerations
- The public interest may outweigh an individual citizen's apprehended breach of constitutional rights
Court orders
#- 1.The three Notice of Motion applications dated 13th November 2024, 3rd December 2025 and 8th December 2025 are dismissed as unmerited
- 2.Costs in the cause
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Constitutional petition; not expressly stated in the excerpt
Relief refused
#Conservatory order staying implementation of the Respondents' decision to evict/demolish the Petitioners' dwelling places pending determination of the Petition
Petitioners did not demonstrate a prima facie case; the public interest in the project outweighs their interest; the interim reliefs would paralyze implementation of the project
Costs
Costs will be in the cause.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In the foregoing, I find the three instant Notice of Motion applications unmerited and will disallow them.
Costs will be in the cause.
I hence find that the Petitioners have not established a prima facie case to warrant the grant of conservatory orders as sought.
I find that the import of the project, which is in public interest outweigh the Petitioners’ interest.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment dates the second application 3rd December 2025 while the prayer text within it refers to an application dated 13th December 2024, inconsistent with the first application dated 13th November 2024
Application dated 8th December 2025 refers to intended demolitions on 12th December 2025, seemingly a year after the notice of November 2024; internal dating appears inconsistent
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ibrahim & 2 others v Cabinet Secretary for Interior & Coordination of National Government & 4 others (Environment and Land Constitutional Petition E091 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 6 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the excerpt provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/6/eng@2026-01-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.