[2014] KEHC 280 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 280 (KLR)

The court found that the parties, through their respective counsel, had freely entered into a consent settling all issues in the suit. The consent, duly signed and presented to the court, was adopted as the judgment of the court. As a result, the suit was marked as fully settled, and the parties were precluded from...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 280 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Adan Mohamed Adan; Plaintiff: Bernard Meme M'limbiine; Plaintiff: Mohamed Ibrahim Jirow; Plaintiff: Adan Ibrahim Ahmed; Plaintiff: Farihiya A Jassan; Plaintiff: Stanely Kubai M'Anaiba; Plaintiff: Joel Ncobiiri Kiamba; Plaintiff: John Mbogo Githinji; Plaintiff: Julius Muriuki M'ibere; Plaintiff: Geoffrey Kaberia Mwirabua; Plaintiff: Sarah Golicha; Plaintiff: Muslima Duba; Defendant: Alice Mahinda; Defendant: Gladys Mahinda
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 65 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Consent Judgment
Outcome
suit settled by consent; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
Consent Judgment, Permanent Injunction, Possession of Land, Settlement of Suit
Source Language
en
Land and Property Consent Judgment Permanent Injunction Possession of Land Settlement of Suit

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adan Mohamed Adan

Plaintiff

Bernard Meme M'limbiine

Plaintiff

Mohamed Ibrahim Jirow

Plaintiff

Adan Ibrahim Ahmed

Plaintiff

Farihiya A Jassan

Plaintiff

Stanely Kubai M'Anaiba

Plaintiff

Joel Ncobiiri Kiamba

Plaintiff

John Mbogo Githinji

Plaintiff

Julius Muriuki M'ibere

Plaintiff

Geoffrey Kaberia Mwirabua

Plaintiff

Sarah Golicha

Plaintiff

Muslima Duba

Plaintiff

Alice Mahinda

Defendant

Gladys Mahinda

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Consent Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the parties have reached a binding consent settling the dispute over possession and use of specified rooms on plot No. 7918/53, Isiolo town.
  2. 2 Whether the consent should be adopted as a judgment of the court, thereby fully settling the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the parties, through their respective counsel, had freely entered into a consent settling all issues in the suit. The consent, duly signed and presented to the court, was adopted as the judgment of the court. As a result, the suit was marked as fully settled, and the parties were precluded from bringing the matter back to court. The court emphasized that a consent judgment is binding and final unless set aside for fraud, collusion, or any other sufficient cause, none of which was alleged or established in this case.

Court Disposition

suit settled by consent; no order as to costs

Orders

  • The consent dated 18.8.2014 is adopted as an order of the court.
  • The suit is marked as fully settled.