[2021] KEELC 4719 (KLR)
The court found that although interim status quo orders had been issued ex parte, there was no evidence that the respondents had been served with notice of the mention date for further directions. The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to the right to be heard and procedural fairness under Article 50 of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELC 4719 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: James Gachiri Mwangi; Respondent: John Waweru Muriuki; Respondent: Sarah Waithera Waweru; Respondent: Samwel Waweru Ndungu; Respondent: Martin Macharia Wambui
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nyahururu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 6 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Directions
- Outcome
- Application stood over for directions; no substantive orders granted.
- Legal Topics
- Injunctive Relief, Status Quo Orders, Contempt of Court, Case Management
- 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
James Gachiri Mwangi
Applicant
John Waweru Muriuki
Respondent
Sarah Waithera Waweru
Respondent
Samwel Waweru Ndungu
Respondent
Martin Macharia Wambui
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Directions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to injunctive orders against the respondents pending hearing and determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether the respondents were in contempt of the court's status quo orders.
- 3 Whether the application was properly set for hearing with notice to all parties.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although interim status quo orders had been issued ex parte, there was no evidence that the respondents had been served with notice of the mention date for further directions. The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to the right to be heard and procedural fairness under Article 50 of the Constitution and the Civil Procedure Act. As a result, the court declined to proceed with the application in the absence of proper notice to the respondents and directed that the matter be placed before the judge for further directions to ensure expeditious and fair disposal of the application.
Court Disposition
Application stood over for directions; no substantive orders granted.
Orders
- The matter to be placed before the Judge for further directions on expeditious disposal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT NYAHURURU
ELC NO. 6 OF 2020 (OS)
JAMES GACHIRI MWANGI.....................................................PLAINTIFF/ APPLICANT
-VERSUS-
JOHN WAWERU MURIUKI...........................................1st DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
SARAH WAITHERA WAWERU...................................2nd DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
SAMWEL WAWERU NDUNGU....................................3rd DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
MARTIN MACHARIA WAMBUI.................................4th.DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
RULING
1. What is before the court for determination is therefore the original application dated the 25th February 2020 by way of Notice of Motion made under Order 50 Rule 1, Order 40 Rule 1 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act where the Plaintiff/Applicant seeks injunctive orders against the Respondents.
2. On the 25th February 2020, there were ex-parte interim orders of status quo issued and the Applicant directed to serve their application upon the Respondent so that the matter could proceed for inter-parties hearing on the 28th April 2020.
3. While the matter was pending hearing, Counsel for the Plaintiff filed another application under certificate of urgency dated the 7th April 2020, wherein he sought for orders that the 3rd and 4th Defendants/Respondents be summoned to Court to show cause why they should not be committed to civil jail for blatantly failing to comply with the orders of status quo issued by the Court and in default they be committed to jail for a maximum of 6 months for contempt of the said Court order. The said application was heard and dismissed via the court’s ruling of the 25th June 2020.
4. On the 5th October 2020 the matter came up for mention to confirm compliance of the orders issued on the 25th February 2020 regarding the Application dated the 25th February 2020 wherein only the Plaintiff/Applicant’s Counsel was present. I note that although there had been Replying Affidavits filed by both the 3rd and 4th Respondents on the 17th April 2020 and 23rd April 2020 respectively, there had neither been a notice served upon the Respondents of the Mention date for the 5th October 2020 nor directions taken as to how the said Application dated the 25th February 2020 would be dispensed with.
5. In line with the provisions of Article 50 of the Constitution and Section 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, I do direct that this matter be placed before the Judge for further directions on its expeditious disposal.
Dated and delivered at Nakuru this 13th day of January 2021
M.C. OUNDO
ENVIRONMENT & LAND – JUDGE