[2018] KEELC 1228 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 1228 (KLR)

The court found that the defendant's officials had initially breached the court orders restraining interference with the plaintiffs' land parcels. However, by the time of the ruling, the contemnors had purged the contempt by complying with the court's directive to properly fence the suit land. Both parties'...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 1228 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Charles Iguna Nduyo; Plaintiff: Kithetu Mugambi; Plaintiff: Agnes Karia Makanya; Defendant: Gituri Primary School (sued through chairman, secretary & treasurer of school management committee); Applicant: The Board of Management M.C.K. Gituri Primary School (through the chairperson and secretary)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Chuka
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 60 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application / Ruling on Contempt Application
Outcome
application marked as settled
Judges
FM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Enforcement of Judgments, Land Ownership Disputes, Injunctive Relief
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Enforcement of Judgments Land Ownership Disputes Injunctive Relief

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Iguna Nduyo

Plaintiff

Kithetu Mugambi

Plaintiff

Agnes Karia Makanya

Plaintiff

Gituri Primary School (sued through chairman, secretary & treasurer of school management committee)

Defendant

The Board of Management M.C.K. Gituri Primary School (through the chairperson and secretary)

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application / Ruling on Contempt Application

  1. 1 Whether the defendant and its officials were in contempt of court orders issued on 28th March, 2018.
  2. 2 Whether the alleged contemnors had knowledge of the court orders and willfully disobeyed them.
  3. 3 Whether the contempt has been purged and if the application should be marked as settled.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's officials had initially breached the court orders restraining interference with the plaintiffs' land parcels. However, by the time of the ruling, the contemnors had purged the contempt by complying with the court's directive to properly fence the suit land. Both parties' advocates confirmed compliance in open court. As a result, the court marked the application as settled, emphasizing that compliance with court orders is mandatory and that contempt proceedings may be discontinued if the breach is remedied before determination.

Court Disposition

application marked as settled

Orders

  • The application is marked as settled in view of the contemnors having purged the contempt by fencing the suit land properly.
  • No further orders as to committal are issued.