[2010] KEHC 2931 (KLR)

[2010] KEHC 2931 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy any of the three conditions required for the grant of an interlocutory injunction as set out in Giella v Cassman Brown. The applicant did not establish a prima facie case with a probability of success, nor did she demonstrate that she would suffer irreparable loss if the injunction was not granted. There was already a valid order requiring the applicant to vacate the respondent's land, which had not been challenged. The balance of convenience therefore favoured the respondent. Additionally, the court held that the application was fatally defective due to a significant variance between the reliefs sought in the application and those in...

Citation
[2010] KEHC 2931 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Mary Waitherero Gitau; Respondent: Margaret Njoki Njukira
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
19 March 2010
Case Number
Civil Suit 381 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
AT Sitati
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Injunctive Relief, Land Title Disputes, Limitation of Actions
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Injunctive Relief Land Title Disputes Limitation of Actions

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Waitherero Gitau

Applicant

Margaret Njoki Njukira

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case with a probability of success for grant of a temporary injunction.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable loss if the injunction is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience tilts in favour of the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy any of the three conditions required for the grant of an interlocutory injunction as set out in Giella v Cassman Brown. The applicant did not establish a prima facie case with a probability of success, nor did she demonstrate that she would suffer irreparable loss if the injunction was not granted. There was already a valid order requiring the applicant to vacate the respondent's land, which had not been challenged. The balance of convenience therefore favoured the respondent. Additionally, the court held that the application was fatally defective due to a significant variance between the reliefs sought in the application and those in...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The Plaintiff's Chamber Summons application dated 30/07/2009 is dismissed with costs to the Defendant.
  • The interim order issued on 31/07/2009 is discharged.