Munene v M’arimi & another (Environment and Land Case E027 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2855 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court in Meru refused to protect a family land claim because the claimant had no grant of representation and told courts two conflicting stories.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicant demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success
No - she lacked demonstrated locus standi, gave contradictory positions before the succession court, and did not substantiate the claim of a customary trust or the allegation that the late Ntaari was a minor in 1965
The court found the applicant had not exhibited a grant empowering her to sue for the estate. Her prior succession petition sought absolute devolution of the suit land to her sister, contradicting the trust claim. The register showed the land in the late M'Arimi's name for 60 years, and she offered no evidence that the late Ntaari was a minor at registration.
Whether the applicant demonstrated irreparable damage not compensable by damages
No - absent demonstrated locus standi and given falsehoods presented to the succession court, no legitimate interest anchored on a trust was shown
The court held that without clear demonstration of locus standi, and given the applicant's prior contradictory presentation of facts to the succession court, she failed to establish a legitimate interest in the suit land anchored on a customary trust, or that she would suffer damage beyond an award of damages.
Whether the balance of convenience favoured granting the injunction
No - it does not favour a litigant who recently sought inconsistent succession orders over the same land
The court reasoned that the balance of convenience cannot favour a litigant who, shortly before, had gone to the succession court to secure orders vesting the very suit land in her sister as absolute proprietor on sharply contrasting facts relating to ownership and devolution.
Legal principles established
#- The criteria for an interlocutory injunction is a prima facie case with probability of success, irreparable injury not compensable by damages, and, in doubt, the balance of convenience
- A litigant suing on behalf of a deceased person's estate must exhibit a duly issued grant of representation to demonstrate locus standi
- Definitive or conclusive pronouncements on key issues should not be made at the interlocutory stage
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 26/9/2025 is rejected and dismissed for lack of merit
- 2.The applicant shall bear costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over disputes relating to land; interlocutory application under ordinary injunctive criteria
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Munene v M’arimi & another (Environment and Land Case E027 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2855 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELCL Case No. E027 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2855/eng@2026-05-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.