[2023] KEELC 21881 (KLR)
The court found that the petitioners had not demonstrated any special circumstances warranting the grant of a mandatory injunction at the interlocutory stage. The court reiterated its earlier position that issuing an order for the re-opening of the road would amount to reviewing its previous orders, which it had not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 21881 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Sunguyo Ole Chebugel; Applicant: Chirchir Kipkoech Joel; Applicant: Valentine Jepkoech Kosgei; Applicant: Enock Kipyepkwai Chepsom; Respondent: Kenya Rural Roads Authority; Respondent: The Chief Land Registrar; Respondent: The Director Of Survey; Respondent: The Hon Attorney General; Respondent: Jackson Lagat; Respondent: The County Government Of Nakuru; Respondent: The County Government Of Baringo; Respondent: The National Land Commission; Interested Party: Wilfred Chebon Rono; Interested Party: Samson Kipchumba Kipngok; Interested Party: Kibichii Mogotio; Interested Party: Jeniffer Lagat
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Petition E004 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications
- Outcome
- Interlocutory applications dismissed; matter to proceed to hearing of the main petition.
- Judges
- LA Omollo
- Legal Topics
- Public Road Access, Mandatory Injunctions, Security for Costs, Survey Reports, Land Boundaries
- 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
Sunguyo Ole Chebugel
Applicant
Chirchir Kipkoech Joel
Applicant
Valentine Jepkoech Kosgei
Applicant
Enock Kipyepkwai Chepsom
Applicant
Kenya Rural Roads Authority
Respondent
The Chief Land Registrar
Respondent
The Director Of Survey
Respondent
The Hon Attorney General
Respondent
Jackson Lagat
Respondent
The County Government Of Nakuru
Respondent
The County Government Of Baringo
Respondent
The National Land Commission
Respondent
Wilfred Chebon Rono
Interested Party
Samson Kipchumba Kipngok
Interested Party
Kibichii Mogotio
Interested Party
Jeniffer Lagat
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioners are entitled to a temporary mandatory injunction to compel the 5th respondent to re-open the Muserech-Orinie-Kapsatek road pending the hearing of the petition.
- 2 Whether the 5th respondent is entitled to security for costs from the petitioners.
- 3 Whether the expert survey report should be adopted as a basis for interim orders.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the petitioners had not demonstrated any special circumstances warranting the grant of a mandatory injunction at the interlocutory stage. The court reiterated its earlier position that issuing an order for the re-opening of the road would amount to reviewing its previous orders, which it had not been moved to do. The court also dismissed the 5th respondent's application for security for costs, finding no sufficient basis for such an order. The court held that the substantive issues, including the adoption of the survey report and the question of re-opening the road, are to be determined at the full hearing of the petition. Accordingly, the matter was directed to...
Court Disposition
Interlocutory applications dismissed; matter to proceed to hearing of the main petition.
Orders
- No temporary mandatory injunction is granted for re-opening the Muserech-Orinie-Kapsatek road at this stage.
- Application for security for costs by the 5th respondent is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
59 paragraphs
Chebugel & 3 others v Kenya Rural Roads Authority & 7 others; Rono (Suing as the legal representative of the Estate of Cherono Chebowo (Deceased) & 3 others (Interested Parties) (Environment & Land Petition E004 of 2022) [2023] KEELC 21881 (KLR) (23 November 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 21881 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
Environment & Land Petition E004 of 2022
LA Omollo, J
November 23, 2023
Between
Sunguyo Ole Chebugel
1st Petitioner
Chirchir Kipkoech Joel
2nd Petitioner
Valentine Jepkoech Kosgei
3rd Petitioner
Enock Kipyepkwai Chepsom (Suing on their own behalf and on behalf of all the members of the public using the Muserech-Orinie-Kapsatek Road)
4th Petitioner
and
Kenya Rural Roads Authority
1st Respondent
The Chief Land Registrar
2nd Respondent
The Director Of Survey
3rd Respondent
The Hon Attorney General
4th Respondent
Jackson Lagat
5th Respondent
The County Government Of Nakuru
6th Respondent
The County Government Of Baringo
7th Respondent
The National Land Commission
8th Respondent
and
Wilfred Chebon Rono (Suing as the legal representative of the estate of Cherono Chebowo (Deceased)
Interested Party
Samson Kipchumba Kipngok
Interested Party
Kibichii Mogotio
Interested Party
Jeniffer Lagat
Interested Party
Ruling
Introduction. 1. This court delivered a ruling on 23rd March, 2023.
2. The ruling was in respect of an application for temporary mandatory injunction against the 5th Respondent to restrain him from blocking, erecting barbed wire on fencing posts on a portion of the Muserech Orinie – Kapsatek road (which road is said to pass next to his parcel of land) pending the hearing and determination of this petition among other orders.
3. This application was filed by the Petitioners herein.
4. The ruling of 23rd March, 2023 also dealt with the 5th Respondents application dated 1st July, 2022. The said application sought orders compelling the Petitioners to deposit in court an amount of ksh 10,000,000 as security for costs of this suit.
5. In the final result, this court declined to grant the Petitioners orders of temporary injunction but only allowed prayer (g) of the application which was that the 2nd and 3rd Respondents prepare and file a report containing information on ownership and boundaries of parcels of land adjacent to the Muserech-Orinie-Kapsatek road.
6. The application by the 5th Respondents for security for costs was dismissed.
7. Subsequently and pursuant to the order issued by this court the Regional Surveyor Rift Valley Region filed his report dated 2nd October, 2023.
8. The Petitioners Advocate made submissions that on the basis of this report, the Muserech-Orinie-Kapsatek Road should be open stating that the alternative road currently being used by the Petitioners is in a bad state.
9. The 5th Respondent in his submissions on whether he had seen the report (which the court had given him time to look at) stated that they were not involved in the survey and therefore do not agree with its contents. He stated that he was desirous of the court visiting the Locus in quo.
10. Counsel for the 8th Respondent (National Land Commission) in her submissions noted that counsel for the 5th Respondent was questioning an expert report and stated that the only proper way to do so is to get an alternative expert report. She concluded that she supports the re-opening of the road.
11. Counsel for the Petitioners in his conclusion reminded this court that Kenya Rural Roads Authority (1st Respondent), the National Land Commission (8th Respondent) and the Attorney General support the re-opening of the road.
12. The question of re-opening the road is a matter for determination in the Petition as can be seen from prayer (iii).
13. In the ruling of 23rd March, 2023 this court stated at paragraph III that the Petitioners/Applicants had not demonstrated any special circumstances that would warrant the grant of an order of a mandatory injunction at this stage of the proceedings.
14. That position has not changed. Issuing any order for re-opening of the road at this stage wold amount to reviewing my orders which I have not been moved to do and which I shall not do.
15. I order that the matter proceeds to taking directions on the hearing of the Petition.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAKURU THIS 23RD DAY, OF NOVEMBER, 2023. L.A. OMOLLOJUDGE.In the presence of:Mr. Oloo for PetitionersMr. Mutai for Andama for 5th Respondent and 1st-4th Interested PartyAttorney General for 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondent6th Respondent- Absent7th Respondent- Absent8th Respondent- AbsentCourt Assistant: Ms. Monica Wanjohi.