Seroney & 5 others v County Government of Nandi (Land Case E017 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 1756 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused to jail Nandi County officials for contempt because the injunction order was never properly served and lacked a penal notice.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the orders of 17th October 2024 were clear and unambiguous
The orders were expressed in plain English language and were clear and unambiguous, satisfying the first element
The court reproduced the orders of 17th October 2024 (a temporary injunction restraining the respondent from encroaching on or evicting the applicants from the suit parcels) and found them plainly worded, in consonance with Article 7(2) of the Constitution and section 23 of the Environment and Land Court Act. This element was therefore met, but it alone was insufficient.
Whether the alleged contemnors had knowledge or proper notice of the order
Knowledge was not established: the order lacked a penal notice and was not personally served on the respondent as prescribed by Order 5 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules, service having been effected late on a secretary
Contempt is quasi-criminal; personal service and a penal notice are mandatory. Service was on a secretary, less than a day before the events complained of, and the order carried no penal notice. These defects were fatal/premature for committal, so the second element failed.
Whether the alleged breach was attributable to the respondent rather than the National Government
The alleged acts were attributed to the National Government, which is independent of the county government, and the Fourth Schedule distribution of functions supported the respondent's position
The respondent averred it did not enter the suit parcels and that the site was handed over to a contractor by the National Government for affordable housing. The court found the Fourth Schedule to the Constitution clear on the distribution of functions, so the replying affidavit undermined the claim of deliberate breach by the respondent.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant for contempt must establish four elements: clear and unambiguous terms of the order binding on the defendant, knowledge or proper notice of the order, breach of the order, and deliberateness of the breach
- Personal service of the court order together with a penal notice is mandatory in contempt/committal proceedings, which are quasi-criminal in nature
- There is a plain and unqualified obligation on every person against whom a court order is made to obey it unless and until it is discharged
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 5th June 2025 is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application to the respondent in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 5(1) of the Judicature Act (Cap 8 Laws of Kenya) as read with section 29 of the Environment and Land Court Act 2015
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Seroney & 5 others v County Government of Nandi (Land Case E017 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 1756 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment (ruling on Notice of Motion dated 5th June 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/1756/eng@2026-03-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.