[2007] KEHC 65 (KLR)
The court found that the dispute was not clear as the respondent had not been heard, and there were no special circumstances to warrant the grant of an interlocutory mandatory injunction. The court held that such relief should only be granted after hearing the suit, either ex parte or inter partes. Granting the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2007] KEHC 65 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Charles Munene; Defendant: Weru Tea Factory Co. Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 57 of 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- SP Ouko
- Legal Topics
- Mandatory Injunction, Interlocutory Relief, Burden of Proof
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Charles Munene
Plaintiff
Weru Tea Factory Co. Ltd
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a mandatory injunction at the interlocutory stage.
- 2 Whether there are special circumstances justifying the grant of a mandatory injunction before hearing the respondent.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the dispute was not clear as the respondent had not been heard, and there were no special circumstances to warrant the grant of an interlocutory mandatory injunction. The court held that such relief should only be granted after hearing the suit, either ex parte or inter partes. Granting the relief at this stage would be premature. Consequently, the application for a mandatory injunction was dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU Civil Case No.57 of 2007
CHARLES MUNENE ………………………………………. PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
WERU TEA FACTORY CO.LTD ………………………….. DEFENDANT
RULING
This is yet another application against the respondent seeking that it pays to the applicant Kshs.74,385/= in green tea leaves received by the respondent.
It is a relief for a mandatory injunction which can only be granted at this stage in very clear cases and where there are special circumstances. The dispute in this application is not clear as I have not heard the respondent.
There are no special circumstances which would warrant the grant of interlocutory mandatory injunction. It is only after hearing the suit, either in the absence of the respondent or interpartes that such a relief can be granted.
Clearly from the affidavit in support of this application, the applicant has intimated that the reason why the respondent has refused to pay up.
It would be premature to grant the relief sought. In the result this application must fail and is dismissed.
There will be no orders as to costs.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT MERU THIS 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2007
W. OUKO
JUDGE