[2015] KEHC 5187 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 5187 (KLR)

The court found that the second defendant, as the registered owner of the suit land, had demonstrated sufficient grounds for varying the interim orders. The perishable nature of the materials and crops, the risk of wastage and vandalism, and the potential exposure to litigation from suppliers justified granting...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 5187 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joyce Nyakio; Applicant: Keith Kamau N'Thambiri; Applicant: Victoria Helen Wambiro; Respondent: Ephraim Ndwiga N'Thambiri; Respondent: Jim Njamu Njiru
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Embu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 271 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Vary Interim Orders
Outcome
application allowed; interim orders varied
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Orders, Access to Land, Farming Rights, Variation of Orders
Source Language
en
Land and Property Interlocutory Orders Access to Land Farming Rights Variation of 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

Joyce Nyakio

Applicant

Keith Kamau N'Thambiri

Applicant

Victoria Helen Wambiro

Applicant

Ephraim Ndwiga N'Thambiri

Respondent

Jim Njamu Njiru

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Vary Interim Orders

  1. 1 Whether the interim orders granted on 24th March 2015 should be varied to allow the second defendant access to the suit land for farming and related activities.
  2. 2 Whether justice and fairness require the second defendant to be permitted to utilize perishable materials and prevent wastage or vandalism of crops and goods on the land.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the second defendant, as the registered owner of the suit land, had demonstrated sufficient grounds for varying the interim orders. The perishable nature of the materials and crops, the risk of wastage and vandalism, and the potential exposure to litigation from suppliers justified granting access for limited farming activities. The court held that justice and fairness required the variation of the previous order to allow the second defendant to weed, cultivate, and fence the land, pending the final determination of the dispute.

Court Disposition

application allowed; interim orders varied

Orders

  • The second defendant is granted access to the suit land for purposes of weeding and cultivating maize and beans.
  • The second defendant is permitted to fence the suit land to prevent wastage and vandalism.