The Board of Trustees of Kiambu Institute of Science & Technology & 5 Others v Nation Media Group Limited & 3 Others
The bottom line
#Stopping media publication before a trial is very hard in Kenya; courts require clear proof of harm and intent.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicants established a prima facie case with a probability of success to the heightened standard required in defamation cases
They did not; the defences of justification, qualified privilege and fair comment were pleaded with particulars, and falsity and malice are matters for trial
The court applied Micah Cheserem v Immediate Media Services and Gatley on Libel and Slander, holding that injunctions in defamation issue only in the clearest cases. Since the respondents pleaded justification and fair comment on a matter of public interest with factual particulars, and truth is a matter of trial evidence, the court could not find the defences unlikely to succeed.
Whether the applicants demonstrated irreparable damage not compensable by damages and where the balance of convenience lay
The court found it unnecessary to consider these limbs after failing on prima facie case, but noted no evidence of republication or intention to republish since 2017
The court agreed that reputational damage is priceless but found no evidence that the respondents had republished or threatened to republish in the roughly three years since the articles, so the apprehension of further damage was unsupported.
Legal principles established
#- In defamation cases, interlocutory injunctions should be granted only in the clearest of cases where the words complained of are on their face value defamatory, and courts must balance reputation rights against freedom of expression and the media's duty to disseminate information
- Where a defendant pleads justification, qualified privilege and fair comment with particulars of fact, the court cannot at interlocutory stage find those defences unlikely to succeed, and truth/falsity cannot be resolved on affidavit evidence
- An applicant for an injunction to restrain republication must show evidence of republication or an intention to republish; a mere apprehension without evidence is insufficient
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 20th July 2018 is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the High Court in a defamation suit (interlocutory application); no specific constitutional provision invoked as basis of jurisdiction
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "The Board of Trustees of Kiambu Institute of Science & Technology & 5 Others v Nation Media Group Limited & 3 Others", Case Analysis (2020). Not stated in the judgment (plaint filed 20th July 2018; Notice of Motion dated 20th July 2018). Source:
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.