Ongondo & another v Obunga & another (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E057 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 366 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court refused to stop dealings on disputed family land because the applicants produced no evidence of actual interference or threatened eviction.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicants established a prima facie case warranting an interlocutory injunction
No prima facie case was established; the documents annexed did not support the claim of threatened eviction or alienation, and both parties were in occupation
The court applied Sections 107 and 108 of the Evidence Act on burden of proof, requiring the applicants to prove their case on a balance of probabilities. It found no evidence of interference with the 1st applicant's portion and noted the documents annexed did not demonstrate a threat of eviction. Granting the injunction would effectively dispossess the 1st respondent of the portion he has long occupied, which the court considered unfair.
Whether the conditions for injunctive relief under Giella v Cassman Brown and Order 40 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules were met
Since no prima facie case was established, the court did not proceed to consider irreparable harm or balance of convenience
The court restated the sequential application of the Giella conditions as clarified in Nguruman, holding that a prima facie case must be surmounted before the other limbs arise. Having found no prima facie case, the remaining conditions need no consideration and the discretionary, equitable nature of the injunction justified refusal.
Legal principles established
#- The Giella v Cassman Brown conditions are to be applied separately and sequentially; where no prima facie case is established, the court need not consider irreparable injury or balance of convenience
- An injunction is an equitable remedy granted at the court's discretion, to be exercised judiciously
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 1st September 2025 is dismissed
- 2.Each party to bear their own costs of the application
- 3.The parties are directed to file trial bundles within the next thirty (30) days
- 4.The suit shall be mentioned on 1st April 2026 for compliance
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 40 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 (interim injunctive relief in a pending land suit)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ongondo & another v Obunga & another (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E057 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 366 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Chamber Summons application dated 1st September 2025 (suit over L.R. Number Kasipul/Kakelo Dudi/28). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/366/eng@2026-01-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.