[2011] KECA 140 (KLR)

[2011] KECA 140 (KLR)

The Court found that the applicant had satisfied both limbs required for the grant of an injunction under rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. Firstly, the intended appeal was not frivolous as it raised substantial legal questions, particularly regarding the jurisdiction of the Borabu Land Disputes Tribunal to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KECA 140 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Florence Nyaboke Machani; Respondent: Mogere Amosi Ombui; Respondent: Simon Tengeri Mogere; Respondent: Welson Omwenga Nyakundi
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 101 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Injunction and Stay Pending Intended Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed with conditions.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Land Disputes Tribunal, Injunctive Relief, Stay of Execution, Title Registration, Appeals Process
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of Land Disputes Tribunal Injunctive Relief Stay of Execution Title Registration Appeals Process

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Florence Nyaboke Machani

Applicant

Mogere Amosi Ombui

Respondent

Simon Tengeri Mogere

Respondent

Welson Omwenga Nyakundi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Application for Injunction and Stay Pending Intended Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the Borabu Land Disputes Tribunal had jurisdiction to adjudicate over titled land parcels.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated an arguable appeal and that the intended appeal would be rendered nugatory if the injunction is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents should be restrained from disposing of or interfering with the suit land pending appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicant had satisfied both limbs required for the grant of an injunction under rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. Firstly, the intended appeal was not frivolous as it raised substantial legal questions, particularly regarding the jurisdiction of the Borabu Land Disputes Tribunal to adjudicate over titled land. Secondly, the applicant demonstrated that if the injunction was not granted, the respondents might dispose of the suit parcels, thereby rendering the intended appeal nugatory if successful. The Court therefore granted the injunction sought, subject to the applicant providing an undertaking as to costs within 14 days and filing the record of appeal...

Court Disposition

Application allowed with conditions.

Orders

  • An injunction is granted restraining the 2nd and 3rd respondents, their agents or servants from disposing of, alienating, constructing or otherwise interfering with land parcel Nos. ISOGE/KINENI/BLOCK 1/686 and 687 pending the lodging, hearing and determination of the intended appeal.
  • The applicant is to give an undertaking as to costs of the appeal within 14 days from the date of the ruling.