Faith Tabernacle of Klamath Falls v Mahihu & 2 others (Sued as the Chairperson, Secretary and Treasurer of Jammi Homecare Foundation); Ngethe & 2 others (Interested Parties) (In Their Personal Capacities as Chairperson, Secretary and Treasurer of Fountain of Light Centres International) (Environment and Land Case E46 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 86 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court froze a charity's land and assets after evidence of a disputed partnership and unexplained conduct went unrebutted.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Applicant established a prima facie case with a probability of success
The Applicant established a prima facie case through the sale agreement and title deed showing its interest in the suit land, together with unrebuted evidence of the Respondent's conduct, including the change of the facility's name and the burial of the Chairperson's mother on the land.
The court found that the sale agreement and title deed demonstrated the partnership and the Applicant's interest in the suit land. The photographs showed the facility's name had changed from 'Refuge City Complex' to Jammi Homes Foundation, and the Respondent did not address this in the Replying affidavit. Nor did the Respondent address the burial of the Chairperson's mother on the suit land or the appointment of relatives as board members. These unrebutted matters supported the Applicant's apprehension that the Respondents were 'up to no good' regarding the assets and the land.
Whether the Applicant would suffer irreparable injury and whether the balance of convenience favours granting the injunction
The court found the Applicant had met the threshold for the grant of the orders sought, implying that preservation of the assets was necessary and that damages would not be an adequate remedy.
The court applied the Giella v Cassman Brown principles and the Rockland Kenya Limited guidance that an interlocutory injunction protects the plaintiff against injury not adequately compensable in damages. The Respondent's assertion that it did not intend to dispose of the assets was contradicted by the tone of its response, including its claim that the Applicant was not the only donor and had not proved that its funds developed the property. On this basis the court was satisfied that preservation of the assets pending trial was warranted and granted the injunction and access for valuation.
Legal principles established
#- The conditions for grant of an interlocutory injunction are a prima facie case with probability of success, irreparable injury not adequately compensable by damages, and, if in doubt, the balance of convenience.
- Unrebutted affidavit evidence, including documentary evidence of the applicant's interest and the respondent's unexplained conduct, can establish the threshold for an interlocutory injunction.
Court orders
#- 1.A temporary injunction restraining the Defendants/Respondents, their agents, servants or employees from destroying, wasting, transferring, disposing, selling and/or interfering in any manner with the listed assets located at the suit property Bahati/Kabatini Block 1/18514 pending hearing and determination of this suit
- 2.An order granting the Plaintiff/Applicant and its agents access to the suit property Bahati/Kabatini Block 1/18514 for purposes of preparing a comprehensive valuation report to be filed before the court pending hearing and determination of the suit
- 3.The OCS Kiamaina Police Station Nakuru directed to ensure compliance of the orders of the court
- 4.Costs to the Applicant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction over a land dispute; injunctive relief under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Faith Tabernacle of Klamath Falls v Mahihu & 2 others (Sued as the Chairperson, Secretary and Treasurer of Jammi Homecare Foundation); Ngethe & 2 others (Interested Parties) (In Their Personal Capacities as Chairperson, Secretary and Treasurer of Fountain of Light Centres International) (Environment and Land Case E46 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 86 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/86/eng@2026-01-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.