[2019] KEHC 6886 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 6886 (KLR)

The court found that, given the ongoing appeal and the need to preserve the subject matter (the disputed land), it was just and equitable to prohibit both parties from working on the land until the appeal is heard and determined. The court also considered the respondents' willingness to comply with court orders and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 6886 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: John Omollo Anyango; Appellant: Daniel Asila Anyango; Respondent: Topaz Wandae Odero; Respondent: Consolata Anyango Kabwoga; Respondent: Fredrick O. Omboko
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Siaya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 7 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Ruling on Stay and Directions Pending Appeal
Outcome
Interlocutory orders granted; both parties restrained from working on the land; contempt application stayed; directions for submissions issued.
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Succession Disputes, Interlocutory Injunctions, Contempt of Court, Land Possession, Family Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Family and Children Land and Property Succession Disputes Interlocutory Injunctions Contempt of Court Land Possession Family Land 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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Omollo Anyango

Appellant

Daniel Asila Anyango

Appellant

Topaz Wandae Odero

Respondent

Consolata Anyango Kabwoga

Respondent

Fredrick O. Omboko

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Ruling on Stay and Directions Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether both parties should be restrained from working on the disputed land pending determination of the appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the application for contempt of court should be stayed.
  3. 3 What directions should be given for the expeditious hearing of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, given the ongoing appeal and the need to preserve the subject matter (the disputed land), it was just and equitable to prohibit both parties from working on the land until the appeal is heard and determined. The court also considered the respondents' willingness to comply with court orders and their unrepresented status. The application for contempt was stayed to avoid prejudicing the appeal. Directions were issued for the filing of written submissions to ensure expeditious disposal of the appeal, with flexibility for oral submissions for the unrepresented respondents.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory orders granted; both parties restrained from working on the land; contempt application stayed; directions for submissions issued.

Orders

  • Both parties to the appeal are prohibited from working on the disputed portion of land subject of the Succession Cause until the appeal is heard and determined.
  • The application for contempt of court as filed is stayed.