[2018] KEELC 3384 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 3384 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had invoked the correct statutory provision and demonstrated reasonable grounds for the issuance of a prohibitory order under section 56(1) of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act. The absence of opposition from the respondents and the need to preserve the property pending...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 3384 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Ethics & Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC); Respondent: G. Mbugua Mburu; Respondent: Tudor Holdings Ltd
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 16 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Prohibitory Orders
Outcome
application granted
Legal Topics
Asset Freeze Orders, Public Land Protection, Anti Corruption Proceedings
Source Language
en
Land and Property Administrative Law Asset Freeze Orders Public Land Protection Anti Corruption Proceedings

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ethics & Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC)

Applicant

G. Mbugua Mburu

Respondent

Tudor Holdings Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Prohibitory Orders

  1. 1 Whether the court should issue a prohibitory order under section 56(1) of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act to prevent dealings with Meru Plot No. T/184.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has satisfied the statutory requirements for the grant of a prohibitory order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had invoked the correct statutory provision and demonstrated reasonable grounds for the issuance of a prohibitory order under section 56(1) of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act. The absence of opposition from the respondents and the need to preserve the property pending investigations justified the grant of the order. The court accordingly issued a prohibitory order restraining the respondents, their agents, or any other persons from transferring, charging, or otherwise dealing with Meru Plot No. T/184 for a period of six months.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • A prohibitory order is issued prohibiting the respondents, their servants, agents, or any other persons from transferring, charging, or in any other manner dealing with parcel of land known as Meru Plot No. T/184 for a period of six months.