Mwembelegeza Community Residents v Faruk; Secretary County Government of Mombasa & 4 others (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E018 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 4940 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Mombasa court found a county official in contempt for ignoring orders to stop developments on community land, and he must personally appear to explain why he should not be jailed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Service of contempt orders on the 2nd to 5th Respondents
The 2nd to 5th Respondents were not properly served with the orders and thus could not be held in contempt
Order 48 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules requires service in the manner of service of summons, and personal service is a prerequisite to enforcement of an order. The Applicants relied on letters and emails but the court found no evidence of service in the manner required by law on the 2nd to 5th Respondents, and no evidence of the mandate said to require them to effect demolition.
Contempt by the 1st Respondent
The 1st Respondent was aware of the mandamus orders and deliberately disregarded them
The extracted orders were served at the County Attorney's Office on 4th February 2025 and sent to the 1st Respondent by letter dated 7th February 2025, which he acknowledged on 11th February 2025 while inviting the Applicants to a meeting. His failure to act thereafter could only be interpreted as blatant disregard of the orders.
Legal principles established
#- To succeed in civil contempt proceedings the applicant must prove the terms of the order, knowledge of the terms by the respondent, and failure to comply; wilfulness and bad faith are then inferred unless rebutted
- The standard of proof in contempt proceedings is higher than the balance of probabilities, almost but not exactly beyond reasonable doubt
- No order requiring a person to do or abstain from an act may be enforced unless a copy has been served personally on that person
Court orders
#- 1.A Notice to Show Cause is issued requiring the 1st Respondent to appear personally in Court on Tuesday 22nd September 2026 to show cause why he should not be committed to jail for contempt
- 2.The costs of the Application shall be borne by the 1st Respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 5 of the Judicature Act; Section 29 of the Environment and Land Court Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mwembelegeza Community Residents v Faruk; Secretary County Government of Mombasa & 4 others (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E018 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 4940 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). MSA. ELC MISC. E018 OF 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4940/eng@2026-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.