[2022] KEELC 15628 (KLR)
The court held that since a final judgment had already been delivered in the matter, the interlocutory injunctive orders upon which the contempt application was premised were no longer in force. Consequently, the application for contempt was rendered spent and could not be entertained. The plaintiff retains the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELC 15628 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Mohammed Dahir Maalim; Defendant: Fatuma Ahamed; Defendant: Colonel Farah; Defendant: Guled
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case E001 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Contempt Application Post Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for contempt marked as spent due to final judgment.
- Judges
- LN Mbugua
- Legal Topics
- Contempt of Court, Interlocutory Injunctions, Execution of Judgment
- 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
Mohammed Dahir Maalim
Plaintiff
Fatuma Ahamed
Defendant
Colonel Farah
Defendant
Guled
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Contempt Application Post Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for contempt of court is sustainable after final judgment has been delivered.
- 2 Whether the interlocutory injunctive orders remain enforceable post-judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that since a final judgment had already been delivered in the matter, the interlocutory injunctive orders upon which the contempt application was premised were no longer in force. Consequently, the application for contempt was rendered spent and could not be entertained. The plaintiff retains the right to seek implementation and execution of the judgment through appropriate procedures.
Court Disposition
Application for contempt marked as spent due to final judgment.
Orders
- The application dated June 17, 2022 is marked as spent.
- The plaintiff is at liberty to move the court for implementation and execution of the judgment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Maalim v Ahamed & 2 others (Environment & Land Case E001 of 2022) [2022] KEELC 15628 (KLR) (8 December 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELC 15628 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Environment & Land Case E001 of 2022
LN Mbugua, J
December 8, 2022
Between
Mohammed Dahir Maalim
Plaintiff
and
Fatuma Ahamed
1st Defendant
Colonel Farah
2nd Defendant
Guled
3rd Defendant
Ruling
1. While this matter is coming up for judgement, there is also a pending application filed by the Plaintiff dated June 17, 2022 brought under section 4 of the Contempt of Court Act, 2016, Sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 63 (c) of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21 Laws of Kenya and Order 40 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010. It is based on grounds on its face and on the Plaintiff’s supporting affidavit sworn on June 16, 2022.
2. I find that the orders sought are premised on an interlocutory order given on February 8, 2022, where by injunctive orders were granted pending the determination of the suit. However, the court has given a final determination in the matter hence the application is marked as spent. The plaintiff is at liberty to move the court accordingly in terms of implementation and execution of the judgment.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS.LUCY N. MBUGUAJUDGEIn the presence of:-Chelangat for PlaintiffCourt assistant: Eddel/Vanilla