Mose & another v Guyo & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E161 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3209 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court stopped the sale and interference with family land the buyers occupied, protecting their home until the case is decided.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the plaintiffs have established a prima facie case with a probability of success
- 2.Whether the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable loss not compensable by damages if the injunction is not granted
- 3.Whether the balance of convenience favours granting the temporary injunction
Key legal issues
#Prima facie case for interlocutory injunction
The plaintiffs established a prima facie case given their possession and the claim for declaration of constructive trust
The court noted the plaintiffs are in possession of the suit land, have constructed a permanent residential matrimonial house and made improvements, in peaceful and uninterrupted possession since 2021. These facts were not disputed by the defendants, who also did not dispute the attempted mediation before the Chief and Assistant County Commissioner. Given the claim for a declaration of constructive trust, the court found a prima facie case established.
Irreparable loss
Eviction would cause irreparable loss, especially loss of the matrimonial home developed on the land
The court reasoned that the great developments effected on the suit land, including a matrimonial house protected under the law, meant that eviction would cause irreparable harm, particularly the loss of a matrimonial home. This finding supported the second Giella limb, making damages an inadequate remedy and justifying preservation of the status quo pending trial.
Legal principles established
#- The Giella v Cassman Brown principles govern applications for interim injunctions
Court orders
#- 1.Temporary injunction granted in terms of prayers 3 and 4 of the Notice of Motion dated 9th December 2025 restraining the defendants from selling, alienating, subdividing, constructing upon, trespassing into, evicting, fencing off, blocking access to or interfering with the plaintiffs' quiet possession of one acre comprised in the 1st Defendant's undivided share of Title No. Buni/Kisimani/577 pending hearing and determination of the main suit
- 2.Costs of the application shall be in the cause
- 3.Plaintiffs to file trial bundle duly indexed and paginated within 14 days of the order
- 4.Defendants to file their trial bundles within 14 days of expiry of the period granted to the plaintiffs
- 5.Matter to be mentioned on 24th June 2026 for issuance of a hearing date
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court to grant interim injunctions pending trial
Relief refused
#Prayer for the OCS Rabai Police Station to ensure compliance and maintenance of peace on the ground
The court granted only prayers 3 and 4 of the application; the OCS enforcement prayer was not among the orders granted
Costs
The costs of the application shall be in the cause
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In the circumstances of this case, I find that the plaintifis have established a prima facie case.
The plaintifis have thus satisfied the threshold of an application for interim injunction as set out in Giella V Cassman Brown 1973 EA 358.
I therefore find that the application dated 9th December 2025 is merited and the same as granted in terms of prayers no 3 and 4 thereof. The costs of the application shall be in the cause.
Issues in the judgment
#The ruling grants temporary injunction 'pending inter partes hearing and determination' but grants only prayers 3 and 4; prayer 4 (OCS compliance) does not correspond to an injunction, creating ambiguity as to which prayers were intended
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mose & another v Guyo & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E161 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3209 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated (Notice of Motion dated 9th December 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3209/eng@2026-05-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.