[2016] KEELC 664 (KLR)

[2016] KEELC 664 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff, as the personal representative of the registered owner of the suit land, had established a prima facie case with a probability of success. The evidence presented, including the search certificate and photographs of ongoing construction, was unchallenged by the defendant, who...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEELC 664 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Janeffer Chebii Kimetto (suing as the personal representative of the late Jonah Kipkoske Arap Chumo); Defendant: Board of Governors, Chebwagan Youth Polytechnic
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kericho
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 30 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
application for injunction allowed
Judges
MA Silau
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Trespass, Land Ownership, Interlocutory Relief
Source Language
en
Land and Property Injunctions Trespass Land Ownership Interlocutory Relief

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janeffer Chebii Kimetto (suing as the personal representative of the late Jonah Kipkoske Arap Chumo)

Plaintiff

Board of Governors, Chebwagan Youth Polytechnic

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case for grant of an interlocutory injunction against the defendant.
  2. 2 Whether there is a risk of irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of granting the injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff, as the personal representative of the registered owner of the suit land, had established a prima facie case with a probability of success. The evidence presented, including the search certificate and photographs of ongoing construction, was unchallenged by the defendant, who failed to enter appearance or respond to the application. The court held that there was a risk of irreparable loss if the construction was allowed to continue, as it would waste the land. Consequently, the court granted the interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant from continuing construction on the suit land until the conclusion of the suit.

Court Disposition

application for injunction allowed

Orders

  • The defendant is restrained from continuing with any construction on land parcel Kericho/Litein/330 until the conclusion of the suit.
  • The costs of the application shall be costs in the cause.