[2025] KEHC 8859 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 8859 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant and respondent were married, acquired the suit property during marriage, and a mediation settlement (adopted as a court order) confirmed Thika Municipality Block XX/XXX as matrimonial property. The applicant demonstrated a prima facie case for protection of her rights pending distribution. The court accepted evidence of harassment, threats of eviction, and risk of loss of rental income, concluding that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm not compensable by damages if denied relief. The balance of convenience favored the applicant, as her loss would outweigh any inconvenience to the respondent. Given the parties' inability to cooperate, the court...

Citation
[2025] KEHC 8859 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: LMN; Respondent: MNK
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Thika
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
19 June 2025
Case Number
Matrimonial Case E015 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Matrimonial Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction and Management Orders
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
FN Muchemi
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Property, Interlocutory Injunctions, Rental Income Management, Eviction and Occupation Rights
Source Language
English
Family and Children Land and Property Matrimonial Property Interlocutory Injunctions Rental Income Management Eviction and Occupation Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LMN

Applicant

MNK

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Matrimonial Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction and Management Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the respondent from dealing with the matrimonial properties pending determination of the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an order for appointment of a property manager to collect and manage rental income from the disputed properties.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case and stands to suffer irreparable harm if the orders sought are not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant and respondent were married, acquired the suit property during marriage, and a mediation settlement (adopted as a court order) confirmed Thika Municipality Block XX/XXX as matrimonial property. The applicant demonstrated a prima facie case for protection of her rights pending distribution. The court accepted evidence of harassment, threats of eviction, and risk of loss of rental income, concluding that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm not compensable by damages if denied relief. The balance of convenience favored the applicant, as her loss would outweigh any inconvenience to the respondent. Given the parties' inability to cooperate, the court...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • An injunction restraining the respondent from selling, transferring, evicting, or dealing in any manner with Thika Municipality Block XX/XXX and Plot No. XXX Makongeni Phase IV pending determination of the suit.
  • An injunction restraining the respondent from harassing, threatening, or interfering with the applicant's peaceful occupation of the matrimonial home on Thika Municipality Block XX/XXX until determination of the suit.