Kauli (On behalf of the Kwa Kauli Family, Mwabeja Clan) v Makelele & another (Environment and Land Case E035 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 4778 (KLR)

Both parties claimed ownership through their respective families. The Plaintiffs relied on over 100 years of ancestral occupation and on selling and leasing portions with the area chief's authority, which the court held does not cement legal ownership. The Respondents relied on a ruling dated 8th March 2012, but the court found it was made by local chiefs, not a tribunal, and had not been adopted as a court order. With allegations unsupported by sufficient evidence, and the Plaintiffs themselves having sold and leased the land, the first Giella hurdle failed and the rest needed no consideration.

The court distinguished injunctions from status quo orders, holding that the Giella considerations do not apply to status quo orders, which can issue suo motu in exercise of general jurisdiction. In the interest of natural justice, conscience and equity, the court confirmed that the status quo orders would remain in place pending hearing and determination of the suit, barring any leasing, sale, transfer or charging of the property and barring eviction of either party.

Costs follow the event under the proviso to Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, but the award is a matter of judicial discretion guided by the ends of justice and the circumstances of the case. Although the Plaintiff did not prove the case, the court considered it reasonable in the interest of justice that each party bear its own costs of the application, taking into account the emotive and historically sensitive nature of coastal land disputes.