[1995] KECA 107 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had procured the electricity supply to his premises irregularly, with the assistance of unauthorized employees of the respondent who had since been dismissed. On the evidence, the court held that the applicant did not have an arguable appeal. Consequently, the court did not need to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1995] KECA 107 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Norman Mumo; Respondent: Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 300 of 1995
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Miscellaneous Application / Application for Mandatory Injunction Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- RO Kwach
- Legal Topics
- Interlocutory Injunctions, Mandatory Injunctions, Electricity Supply Contracts, Appeals Against Interlocutory Orders
- 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
Norman Mumo
Applicant
Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Miscellaneous Application / Application for Mandatory Injunction Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a mandatory injunction to compel restoration of electricity supply pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated an arguable appeal to warrant the grant of an injunction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had procured the electricity supply to his premises irregularly, with the assistance of unauthorized employees of the respondent who had since been dismissed. On the evidence, the court held that the applicant did not have an arguable appeal. Consequently, the court did not need to consider whether the applicant would suffer irreparable harm or whether damages would be an adequate remedy. The application for a mandatory injunction was therefore dismissed, as the applicant failed to meet the threshold for the grant of such relief under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application for a mandatory injunction is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CIVIL MISC APPL 300 OF 95
NORMAN MUMO ...........................................APPLICANT
AND
KENYA POWER & LIGHTING COMPANY LIMITED................RESPONDENT
RULING OF THE COURT
This is an application under rule 5(2(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules for a mandatory injunction directing the Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited (KPLC) to restore power supply to the premises occupied by the applicant on Plot L.R. No.88/1 Barsheba, Mombasa North. Mbogholi J dismissed the applicant’s application in the superior court. Our provisional perusal of the material documents in this case indicates that the applicant procured the supply of electricity to his premises irregularly by improperly enlisting the assistance of some of the employees of KPLC who had no authority to sign the relevant documents, and have since been dismissed from the service of KPLC.
On this evidence we cannot see that the applicant has an arguable appeal. This being our attitude, though only provisional, we do not have to consider the damage, if any, the applicant will suffer if the injunction can file a suit for damages if he can prove that there has been a breach of a valid contract to supply electricity to his premises. Such damages cannot be beyond the capacity of KPLC to pay. In the circumstances the application fails and is dismissed with costs.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 20th day of December, 1995.
R. O. KWACH
JUDGE OF APPEAL
R. S. C. OMOLO
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A. A. LAKHA
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR