[2025] KEHC 8340 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 8340 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case by providing evidence that the properties were acquired during the marriage and that she contributed to their acquisition and development. The court was satisfied that there was a real risk of the properties being disposed of, especially given the applicant's lack of access to the matrimonial home and evidence of changes in ownership. The court held that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm if the properties were alienated before the suit was determined, as monetary compensation would not be an adequate remedy. The balance of convenience favored preserving the status quo to prevent the applicant's claim from...

Citation
[2025] KEHC 8340 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: BWK; Respondent: AKM
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
13 June 2025
Case Number
Civil Suit E072 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunction allowed.
Judges
PM Nyaundi
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Property, Interlocutory Injunctions, Division of Property, Irreparable Harm, Prima Facie Case
Source Language
English
Family and Children Civil Procedure Matrimonial Property Interlocutory Injunctions Division of Property Irreparable Harm Prima Facie Case

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BWK

Applicant

AKM

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the respondent from disposing of the listed properties pending determination of the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case with a probability of success.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case by providing evidence that the properties were acquired during the marriage and that she contributed to their acquisition and development. The court was satisfied that there was a real risk of the properties being disposed of, especially given the applicant's lack of access to the matrimonial home and evidence of changes in ownership. The court held that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm if the properties were alienated before the suit was determined, as monetary compensation would not be an adequate remedy. The balance of convenience favored preserving the status quo to prevent the applicant's claim from...

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction allowed.

Orders

  • Pending the hearing and determination of the Originating Summons, the respondent or persons exercising authority from him are barred from selling, charging, alienating, transferring, subdividing, giving in exchange or encumbering or in any other way disposing of the listed parcels of land.
  • The Originating Summons will proceed to hearing; parties to take directions.