[2022] KEELC 1216 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 1216 (KLR)

The court found that although it had jurisdiction to grant an injunction pending appeal, the applicants failed to demonstrate an arguable appeal or that the appeal would be rendered nugatory if the injunction was denied. The applicants did not establish a prima facie case as they failed to prove ownership of the disputed parcels of land. The court held that any loss suffered by the applicants from the laying of water pipes could be adequately compensated by damages, and the subject land would remain available post-appeal. The balance of convenience did not favor the applicants, as the respondent's project served a broader community interest. Consequently, the application for injunction...

Citation
[2022] KEELC 1216 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Loyd Mugambi Maina; Appellant: Murimi Mbae; Appellant: Gitonga Murithi; Appellant: Agnes Kanyua Michael; Appellant: M’Rithaa M’Raja; Appellant: Mwenda Gitonga; Appellant: Mbabu Wilson; Appellant: Gitonga Mwiandi; Appellant: Eunice Kanini Mwiandi; Appellant: Gerrald Muriuki; Appellant: Benson Njeru Mwoga; Appellant: Julie Njeru; Appellant: Richard Ndubi Kajogi; Appellant: Annjoy Kangai M’Riria; Appellant: Martin Mbabu Njeru; Appellant: Fredrick Kaburu Mwoga; Appellant: Alexender Murithi Njeru; Appellant: Mawira Ndubi; Appellant: Kariuki Murungi; Appellant: Doreen Kinya; Respondent: Kirumi Kiamujari Water Project (sued through its Registered Trustees/officials)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Chuka
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
1 March 2022
Case Number
Environment & Land Case E15 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Injunction Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Injunction Pending Appeal, Wayleave Acquisition, Compensation for Land, Prima Facie Case, Irreparable Harm, Balance of Convenience
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunction Pending Appeal Wayleave Acquisition Compensation for Land Prima Facie Case Irreparable Harm Balance of Convenience

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Loyd Mugambi Maina

Appellant

Murimi Mbae

Appellant

Gitonga Murithi

Appellant

Agnes Kanyua Michael

Appellant

M’Rithaa M’Raja

Appellant

Mwenda Gitonga

Appellant

Mbabu Wilson

Appellant

Gitonga Mwiandi

Appellant

Eunice Kanini Mwiandi

Appellant

Gerrald Muriuki

Appellant

Benson Njeru Mwoga

Appellant

Julie Njeru

Appellant

Richard Ndubi Kajogi

Appellant

Annjoy Kangai M’Riria

Appellant

Martin Mbabu Njeru

Appellant

Fredrick Kaburu Mwoga

Appellant

Alexender Murithi Njeru

Appellant

Mawira Ndubi

Appellant

Kariuki Murungi

Appellant

Doreen Kinya

Appellant

Kirumi Kiamujari Water Project (sued through its Registered Trustees/officials)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Injunction Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant a temporary injunction restraining the respondent from laying a water pipeline pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success.
  3. 3 Whether refusal to grant the injunction would render the appeal nugatory.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although it had jurisdiction to grant an injunction pending appeal, the applicants failed to demonstrate an arguable appeal or that the appeal would be rendered nugatory if the injunction was denied. The applicants did not establish a prima facie case as they failed to prove ownership of the disputed parcels of land. The court held that any loss suffered by the applicants from the laying of water pipes could be adequately compensated by damages, and the subject land would remain available post-appeal. The balance of convenience did not favor the applicants, as the respondent's project served a broader community interest. Consequently, the application for injunction...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 29th November, 2021 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.