[2011] KEHC 1123 (KLR)

[2011] KEHC 1123 (KLR)

The court held that the applicants' application for injunction was incompetent as it sought orders against government officials contrary to Section 16(2) of the Government Proceedings Act. The law prohibits granting injunctions or analogous orders against government officers where such relief could be obtained...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KEHC 1123 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joseph Wahinya Mwaura; Applicant: Lucas Mambo Mwaura; Applicant: John Mburu Mwaura; Applicant: Teresia Wambui Mwaura; Applicant: Lucia Wanjiku Mwaura; Respondent: Njuguna Githuka; Respondent: Francis Ndere Githuka; Respondent: Antony M. Wamburu (Administrator/representative of the estate of Wamburu Githuka (deceased))
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 404 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondents
Judges
A Mbogholi-Msagha
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Injunctions Against Government, Government Proceedings Act, Land Title Disputes
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Injunctions Against Government Government Proceedings Act Land Title 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

Joseph Wahinya Mwaura

Applicant

Lucas Mambo Mwaura

Applicant

John Mburu Mwaura

Applicant

Teresia Wambui Mwaura

Applicant

Lucia Wanjiku Mwaura

Applicant

Njuguna Githuka

Respondent

Francis Ndere Githuka

Respondent

Antony M. Wamburu (Administrator/representative of the estate of Wamburu Githuka (deceased))

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to an order of injunction restraining the respondents and government officials from dealing with the suit land parcels.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants can obtain relief by way of injunction against government officers under the Government Proceedings Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have established a prima facie case for adverse possession.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicants' application for injunction was incompetent as it sought orders against government officials contrary to Section 16(2) of the Government Proceedings Act. The law prohibits granting injunctions or analogous orders against government officers where such relief could be obtained against the government itself. The court further noted that the proper procedure for challenging actions by government officials is either through judicial review or by suing the Attorney General, not by direct suit against the officials in their official capacity. As such, the application was dismissed with costs to the respondents, and the court declined to consider the merits of...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondents

Orders

  • The application dated 31st August, 2010 is dismissed with costs to the respondents.