Oloomoni v Mbirikani Group Ranch - Co-operative Society Limited & 7 others; Ketente & 2799 others (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Case E053 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 939 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused to freeze a co-operative's land dealings because the applicant offered no real evidence the properties would be sold.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Plaintiff established a prima facie case with a probability of success for a temporary injunction
No prima facie case was established; the claim was unsubstantiated apprehension of disposal of the suit properties
The Court applied Giella v Cassman Brown as elaborated in Mrao Ltd and Nguruman Limited. It found the Plaintiff's claim rested on unsubstantiated apprehension that the suit properties would be irregularly disposed of, while the Defendants and Interested Parties showed ongoing lease and investment negotiations for the benefit of the membership. No evidence of any intention to sell was provided, and the group ranch previously leased the properties in the ordinary course.
Whether the interim orders issued ex parte should be set aside for non-disclosure
The interim orders were set aside; sufficient grounds were demonstrated
Relying on Bahadurali Ebrahim Shamji v Al Noor Jamal, the Court reiterated the duty of full and frank disclosure on ex parte applications. The Court found the application was a scheme by the Plaintiff and the 2nd to 4th Defendants to impede the 5th to 7th Defendants from performing their duties as elected officials, and that continuation of the interim orders would prejudice the economic interests of the larger membership.
Whether the Court could determine who the legitimate officials of the 1st Defendant are
The Court declined jurisdiction over that issue, which is pending in Kajiado MCCOMMSU/E005/2024
The Court noted that the question of legitimate officials is the subject of separate proceedings and expressly refrained from determining it, citing the limits of its jurisdiction under Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and Section 13(1) and (2) of the Environment and Land Court Act.
Legal principles established
#- The three Giella v Cassman Brown conditions for a temporary injunction must be satisfied sequentially; failure of the first limb disposes of the application
- A party seeking ex parte injunctive relief is under a duty of full and frank disclosure of all material facts
Court orders
#- 1.The Plaintiff's Notice of Motion dated 2nd May 2025 is dismissed with costs
- 2.The interim orders issued on 7th May 2025 are set aside
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and Section 13(1) and (2) of the Environment and Land Court Act; application under Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 40 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Oloomoni v Mbirikani Group Ranch - Co-operative Society Limited & 7 others; Ketente & 2799 others (Interested Parties) (Environment and Land Case E053 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 939 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment (Ruling in respect of the Plaintiff's Motion dated 2nd May 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/939/eng@2026-02-19
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.