[2025] KEHC 8154 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated a prima facie case for the grant of interim orders, as the respondents had not filed any response to rebut the applicant's claims of threatened interference with the business. The absence of opposition and the evidence of service justified treating the application...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 8154 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Sospeter Kabuba K; Respondent: CS Ministry of Interior and National Administration; Respondent: Nakuru County Commissioner; Respondent: Mau Narok Deputy County Commissioner; Respondent: The Chief Tipis Location; Respondent: The Chief Likia Location; Respondent: The Chief Sururu Location
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition E037 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- interim injunction granted; application allowed as unopposed
- Judges
- JM Nang'ea
- Legal Topics
- Interim Injunctions, Right to Property, Administrative Action, Business Regulation
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Sospeter Kabuba K
Applicant
CS Ministry of Interior and National Administration
Respondent
Nakuru County Commissioner
Respondent
Mau Narok Deputy County Commissioner
Respondent
The Chief Tipis Location
Respondent
The Chief Likia Location
Respondent
The Chief Sururu Location
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to interim orders restraining the respondents from interfering with the applicant's business pending determination of the petition.
- 2 Whether the respondents' actions or threatened actions violate the applicant's constitutional rights.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated a prima facie case for the grant of interim orders, as the respondents had not filed any response to rebut the applicant's claims of threatened interference with the business. The absence of opposition and the evidence of service justified treating the application as unopposed. The court held that restraining the respondents from interfering with the applicant's business was necessary to preserve the subject matter of the petition and prevent potential violation of constitutional rights pending full hearing. Costs were ordered to be in the cause.
Court Disposition
interim injunction granted; application allowed as unopposed
Orders
- The respondents and/or their agents are restrained from shutting down or otherwise interfering with the applicant's business, Leo Bar in Tipis Center, and/or arresting the applicant pending hearing and determination of the petition.
- The costs of the motion shall be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
Kabuba v CS Ministry of Interior and National Administration & 5 others (Petition E037 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 8154 (KLR) (28 May 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 8154 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nakuru
Petition E037 of 2025
JM Nang'ea, J
May 28, 2025
Between
Sospeter Kabuba K
Petitioner
and
CS Ministry of Interior and National Administration
1st Respondent
Nakuru County Commissioner
2nd Respondent
Mau Narok Deputy County Commissioner
3rd Respondent
The Chief Tipis Location
4th Respondent
The Chief Likia Location
5th Respondent
The Chief Sururu Location
6th Respondent
Ruling
1. Vide Notice of Motion dated 12th May 2025, the Petition prays for reliefs as hereunder;-1. That this application be certified as urgent and service be dispensed with in the first instance.2. That pending the hearing of this application inter-parte, the Respondents, their servants and/or agents be restrained from shutting down arresting and in any other way interfering with the Applicants business namely Leo Bar in Tipis Center.3. That pending the hearing and determination of this application inter parte, the Respondents, their servants and/or agents be restrained from shutting down arresting and in any other way interfering with the Applicants business namely Leo Bar in Tipis Center.4. That pending the hearing and determination of this Petition, the Respondents, their servants and/or agents be restrained from shutting down arresting and in any other way interfering with the Applicants business namely Leo Barin Tipis Center.5. That the Officer in Charge Mau Narok Police Station to ensure compliance of this order.6. That the costs of the application be provided for.
2. The application is supported by the Petitioner’s affidavit evidence.
3. The Respondents filed no replies despite evidence of service of the application upon them. The application is therefore deemed as unopposed.
4. Consequently, the application is allowed as follows;-a.The Respondents and/or their agents whatsoever are restrained from shutting down or otherwise interfering with the Petitioner’s business namely, LEO BAR in Tipis Center’s and/or arresting her pending hearing and determination of this Petition.b.The costs of the Motion shall be in the cause.
5. Ruling accordingly.
J. M. NANG’EA, JUDGE.Ruling delivered this 28th day of May, 2025In the presence of:Mr. Bosire Advocate for the ApplicantRespondents, AbsentThe Court Assistant (Jeniffer)J. M. NANG’EA, JUDGE.