Migosi v Chege & 3 others (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E001 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 3402 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Kajiado Environment and Land Court refused an injunction but froze possession and title as they stood on 28 May 2026, giving both sides one year to litigate.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicant established a prima facie case for an interlocutory injunction based on adverse possession
The applicant did not meet the threshold since possession and the adverse possession claim are contested and findings of fact cannot safely be made at the interlocutory stage
The applicant claimed uninterrupted possession since 2012; the respondents asserted the applicant was a recent trespasser of about two years. Because the rival averments have not been tested by cross-examination, the court held that findings of fact should be made with caution, and the Giella v Cassman Brown threshold for a prima facie case was not satisfied.
Whether the court can preserve the position without granting an injunction
The court may maintain the status quo as to possession and title as an ancillary order, time-limited to one year
Relying on Muriithi J's distinction between injunction as a substantive equitable remedy and status quo as an ancillary order, the court found that since it was not in contention that the applicant was in possession, the status quo as to possession and title should be maintained, but time-limited to one year to prevent endless delay.
Legal principles established
#- A court may, where an interlocutory injunction threshold is not met, maintain the status quo as an ancillary order that does not depend on proof of right or wrong
Court orders
#- 1.The status quo obtaining as at 28th May 2026 as to possession and title is issued in respect of Kajiado/Ntashart/35540 and Kajiado/Ntashart/35541
- 2.The status quo order shall remain in place for one year unless the delay in concluding the matter is occasioned by the Respondents, in which event the Court shall be at liberty to extend the status quo orders
- 3.Costs shall abide the outcome of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Civil Procedure Rules, Order 40 Rule 1(a) and (b) (interlocutory injunction in an adverse possession suit under the Limitation of Actions Act)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Migosi v Chege & 3 others (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E001 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 3402 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Originating Summons dated 28th January 2026 (Kajiado). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3402/eng@2026-05-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.