[2025] KEELC 5065 (KLR)

[2025] KEELC 5065 (KLR)

The court found that granting an injunction pending appeal over a property declared non-existent by the trial court would amount to overturning the trial court's findings at an interlocutory stage, which is improper. The applicant failed to demonstrate a prima facie case with a probability of success, as he did not provide documents proving ownership of plot No 304 block 4. The court further held that any potential loss could be compensated by damages and that there was no evidence of imminent alienation or risk to the subject property requiring preservation. The balance of convenience did not favour the applicant, as the respondent was found to be the owner of adjacent plots and had...

Citation
[2025] KEELC 5065 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Stanley Maleto; Respondent: Bernard Maina Thini
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Narok
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
3 July 2025
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal E008 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Injunction Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
LN Gacheru
Legal Topics
Injunction Pending Appeal, Prima Facie Case, Irreparable Harm, Balance of Convenience, Ownership Dispute, Preservation of Subject Matter
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunction Pending Appeal Prima Facie Case Irreparable Harm Balance of Convenience Ownership Dispute Preservation of Subject Matter

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stanley Maleto

Applicant

Bernard Maina Thini

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Injunction Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established grounds for grant of an injunction pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the subject property requires preservation pending determination of the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that granting an injunction pending appeal over a property declared non-existent by the trial court would amount to overturning the trial court's findings at an interlocutory stage, which is improper. The applicant failed to demonstrate a prima facie case with a probability of success, as he did not provide documents proving ownership of plot No 304 block 4. The court further held that any potential loss could be compensated by damages and that there was no evidence of imminent alienation or risk to the subject property requiring preservation. The balance of convenience did not favour the applicant, as the respondent was found to be the owner of adjacent plots and had...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 15th May 2025 is dismissed in its entirety.
  • Costs of the application are awarded to the respondent.