[2014] KEELC 210 (KLR)

[2014] KEELC 210 (KLR)

The court found that while the Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant and others violated the court's injunctive orders by committing acts of arson and demolition on the suit property, the evidence presented was primarily by way of affidavits with conflicting accounts. The Defendant denied being present and produced...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEELC 210 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Reuben Mulwa Kioko; Respondent: Japhet Kahindi Noti Shutu (alias Njanja)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 27 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application / Ruling on Application for Committal for Contempt of Court
Outcome
Application for committal for contempt of court disallowed.
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Injunctive Relief, Arson on Land, Service of Court Orders
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Injunctive Relief Arson on Land Service of Court 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reuben Mulwa Kioko

Applicant

Japhet Kahindi Noti Shutu (alias Njanja)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application / Ruling on Application for Committal for Contempt of Court

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant and others violated and breached the court order issued on 24th February 2014 and extended on 6th March 2014.
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant and others should be committed to civil jail or fined for contempt of court.
  3. 3 Whether the evidence presented is sufficient to establish contempt on a balance of probabilities.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while the Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant and others violated the court's injunctive orders by committing acts of arson and demolition on the suit property, the evidence presented was primarily by way of affidavits with conflicting accounts. The Defendant denied being present and produced receipts to support his alibi, which the Plaintiff claimed were forgeries. The court held that, in the absence of cross-examination of the deponents to resolve these material factual disputes, it would be speculative to make a finding of contempt and commit the alleged contemnors to civil jail. The court emphasized that the proper course would have been to call for...

Court Disposition

Application for committal for contempt of court disallowed.

Orders

  • The application dated 3rd April 2014 is disallowed.
  • Each party shall bear his own costs.