[2017] KEELC 752 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 752 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the disputed parcel S/KABRAS/SHAMBERERE/3609 and has demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success. The applicant showed that unless the injunction is granted, he will suffer loss that cannot be adequately compensated by damages, as the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 752 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Amos Shikomera Ndakwa; Defendant: Samuel Odhiambo Lumbasi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 279 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction
Outcome
temporary injunction granted
Judges
NA Matheka
Legal Topics
Injunctive Relief, Trespass to Land, Ownership Disputes, Prima Facie Case
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunctive Relief Trespass to Land Ownership Disputes Prima Facie Case

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amos Shikomera Ndakwa

Plaintiff

Samuel Odhiambo Lumbasi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case with a probability of success for grant of a temporary injunction.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff will suffer irreparable loss if the injunction is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favors granting the injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the disputed parcel S/KABRAS/SHAMBERERE/3609 and has demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success. The applicant showed that unless the injunction is granted, he will suffer loss that cannot be adequately compensated by damages, as the defendant's continued trespass and interference deprive him of use and enjoyment of his land. The respondent did not oppose the application. Applying the principles in Giella v Cassman Brown, the court determined that the applicant met the threshold for grant of a temporary injunction. The balance of convenience also favored the applicant, who has been in possession and stands to...

Court Disposition

temporary injunction granted

Orders

  • Pending hearing and final determination of the main suit, a temporary injunction is issued restraining the defendant/respondent, his servants, agents, heirs, and personal representatives from trespassing onto, grazing cattle, interfering with, tilling, constructing, disposing of, or otherwise dealing with parcel...
  • Costs of the application are awarded to the applicant.