[2017] KEELC 1451 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 1451 (KLR)

The court declined to grant the ex parte temporary injunction because the applicants failed to provide sufficient particulars regarding the status of a similar case (ELC No. 102/15) in which injunctive orders had already been obtained against the 1st respondent. The court emphasized that, in the absence of clarity...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 1451 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: John Ntoiti Mugambi, Emily Mutua K & Isaiah Mwiti Mungathia (officials of Isiolo Stage View Enterprises C.B.O, acting in the interest of its members); Respondent: Isiolo County Government; Respondent: The Inspector General of Police; Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Constitutional Petition 14 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Temporary Injunction
Outcome
Ex parte application for temporary injunction declined; matter to be heard on priority basis inter partes.
Legal Topics
Right to Property, Eviction, Injunctive Relief, Fundamental Rights, Market Premises Disputes
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Land and Property Right to Property Eviction Injunctive Relief Fundamental Rights Market Premises Disputes

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

John Ntoiti Mugambi, Emily Mutua K & Isaiah Mwiti Mungathia (officials of Isiolo Stage View Enterprises C.B.O, acting in the interest of its members)

Applicant

Isiolo County Government

Respondent

The Inspector General of Police

Respondent

The Hon. Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Temporary Injunction

  1. 1 Whether the petitioners are entitled to an ex parte temporary injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with their business premises pending the hearing and determination of the application and main petition.
  2. 2 Whether the alleged forcible eviction constituted a violation of fundamental rights, including the right to life and property.

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to grant the ex parte temporary injunction because the applicants failed to provide sufficient particulars regarding the status of a similar case (ELC No. 102/15) in which injunctive orders had already been obtained against the 1st respondent. The court emphasized that, in the absence of clarity on the parallel proceedings, it would be inappropriate to grant further ex parte relief. Additionally, the court noted that the main relief sought in the petition involved a declaration on the violation of fundamental rights, which required a determination of the parties' rights and interests in the suit property and could not be resolved ex parte. The court therefore directed...

Court Disposition

Ex parte application for temporary injunction declined; matter to be heard on priority basis inter partes.

Orders

  • The ex parte application for temporary injunction is declined.
  • The matter (both the application and the petition) shall be heard on a priority basis.