[2023] KEELC 21140 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 21140 (KLR)

The court allowed the unopposed notice of motion dated 27/7/2023 on the basis that it was fair, just, and no opposition had been filed. However, the court made the grant of orders conditional upon the deponent of the supporting affidavit filing proper authority to represent the plaintiff company under its seal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 21140 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mubiro Limited; Defendant: James Waweru; Defendant: Joel Osero; Defendant: Peter Kiarie; Defendant: John Kibe; Defendant: Teresa Wakio; Defendant: David Kimiyo; Defendant: Gibson Kwake; Defendant: Muciki Kiiru
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kajiado
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 6 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Unopposed Notice of Motion
Outcome
Notice of motion allowed in terms of prayer 4, subject to conditions.
Judges
MN Gicheru
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Orders, Company Authority, Injunctive Relief
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Interlocutory Orders Company Authority Injunctive Relief

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mubiro Limited

Plaintiff

James Waweru

Defendant

Joel Osero

Defendant

Peter Kiarie

Defendant

John Kibe

Defendant

Teresa Wakio

Defendant

David Kimiyo

Defendant

Gibson Kwake

Defendant

Muciki Kiiru

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Unopposed Notice of Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the unopposed notice of motion dated 27/7/2023 should be allowed as prayed.
  2. 2 Whether the deponent of the supporting affidavit has proper authority to represent the plaintiff company.

Ratio Decidendi

The court allowed the unopposed notice of motion dated 27/7/2023 on the basis that it was fair, just, and no opposition had been filed. However, the court made the grant of orders conditional upon the deponent of the supporting affidavit filing proper authority to represent the plaintiff company under its seal within seven days. The court further ordered that the suit be concluded within one year, failing which the interlocutory order would lapse pursuant to Order 40 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court's reasoning was grounded in the need for procedural regularity in company representation and the statutory limitation on the duration of interlocutory injunctive relief.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion allowed in terms of prayer 4, subject to conditions.

Orders

  • Notice of motion dated 27/7/2023 allowed in terms of prayer 4.
  • Suit to be concluded within one year, otherwise the order lapses under Order 40 rule 6 Civil Procedure Rules.