[2018] KEELC 3872 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 3872 (KLR)

The court found, upon reviewing the motion, supporting affidavits, and the replying affidavit, that the defendants had not complied with the court's orders of 8/3/2011. Consequently, the court exercised its powers under order 40 rule 3(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules to enforce compliance. The court ordered that a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 3872 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Japhether Wamalwa Kilui; Plaintiff: John Siebela Musee; Plaintiff: Johnson Wanjala Mafula; Plaintiff: Timothy Masinde Sindani; Plaintiff: Mary Wasike; Plaintiff: Fragnel Wawire Mirimo; Plaintiff: Henry Masibo; Plaintiff: Nicolas Masika Maikuma; Plaintiff: Titus Musuya Sakwa; Defendant: Mathew Munyole Wafula; Defendant: Ben Machabe Wafula
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Bungoma
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 113 of 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Contempt Motion
Outcome
Warrant of arrest to issue against the defendants for non-compliance with court orders; defendants to be brought to court to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Enforcement of Court Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Enforcement of Court Orders

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

Japhether Wamalwa Kilui

Plaintiff

John Siebela Musee

Plaintiff

Johnson Wanjala Mafula

Plaintiff

Timothy Masinde Sindani

Plaintiff

Mary Wasike

Plaintiff

Fragnel Wawire Mirimo

Plaintiff

Henry Masibo

Plaintiff

Nicolas Masika Maikuma

Plaintiff

Titus Musuya Sakwa

Plaintiff

Mathew Munyole Wafula

Defendant

Ben Machabe Wafula

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Contempt Motion

  1. 1 Whether the defendants have complied with the court orders issued on 8/3/2011.
  2. 2 Whether a warrant of arrest should issue against the defendants for contempt of court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, upon reviewing the motion, supporting affidavits, and the replying affidavit, that the defendants had not complied with the court's orders of 8/3/2011. Consequently, the court exercised its powers under order 40 rule 3(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules to enforce compliance. The court ordered that a warrant of arrest be issued against Mathew Munyole Wafula and Ben Machabe Wafula to bring them before the court to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt of court. This decision was based on the need to uphold the authority of court orders and ensure compliance with judicial directives.

Court Disposition

Warrant of arrest to issue against the defendants for non-compliance with court orders; defendants to be brought to court to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt.

Orders

  • A warrant of arrest shall issue against Mathew Munyole Wafula and Ben Machabe Wafula.
  • The defendants shall be brought before the court to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt of court.