[2017] KEELC 131 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 131 (KLR)

The court found that the consent presented by the parties was properly executed and binding upon them. The court adopted the consent as its order, thereby maintaining the inhibition on the suit property, establishing a joint rent collection mechanism, preserving the status quo by prohibiting development on the land,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 131 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Mary Losike; Respondent: Enrico Ethbitar EminaE; Respondent: Francis Lokume Lekalasimi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 287 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Consent Order
Outcome
Consent adopted as order of the court; parties to comply with terms; each party to bear own costs.
Legal Topics
Inhibition Orders, Status Quo Orders, Joint Rent Collection, Injunctive Relief, Consent Orders
Source Language
en
Land and Property Inhibition Orders Status Quo Orders Joint Rent Collection Injunctive Relief Consent Orders

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Losike

Applicant

Enrico Ethbitar EminaE

Respondent

Francis Lokume Lekalasimi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Consent Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the parties' consent on inhibition, rent collection, and status quo should be adopted as a binding court order.
  2. 2 Whether the injunctive orders should be vacated as per the consent.
  3. 3 Whether the parties should bear their own costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the consent presented by the parties was properly executed and binding upon them. The court adopted the consent as its order, thereby maintaining the inhibition on the suit property, establishing a joint rent collection mechanism, preserving the status quo by prohibiting development on the land, vacating previous injunctive orders, and directing compliance within 14 days. The court further ordered that each party bear their own costs. The decision was grounded in the principle that a consent order, once signed by parties and their advocates, is binding unless set aside for valid legal reasons. The court's role was limited to confirming the validity of the consent and...

Court Disposition

Consent adopted as order of the court; parties to comply with terms; each party to bear own costs.

Orders

  • Inhibition to remain in place pending hearing of the suit.
  • Rent to be collected and deposited in the joint account of the respective advocates; plaintiff and defendant to collect rent on alternate months with plaintiff starting in November and to deposit in the account.