[2020] KEELC 3570 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 3570 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case for the preservation of the status quo, as the respondents sought to compulsorily acquire a larger portion of land than was necessary for the road project, without proper notice or justification. The application was unopposed, and the plaintiffs demonstrated that only a small portion of the land was required for the public purpose, while the remainder was not needed. The court was satisfied that unless the status quo was preserved, the plaintiffs risked suffering irreparable harm that could not be adequately compensated by damages. Accordingly, the court granted the application in terms of prayer (4), ordering that the...

Citation
[2020] KEELC 3570 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Samuel Kisoro Moiben; Plaintiff: Susan Wambui Ndirangu; Plaintiff: James Muriithi; Plaintiff: Samuel Wainaina Gitonga; Plaintiff: Joseph Muiruri; Plaintiff: Ibrahim Mohammed; Plaintiff: Gerald Njonge; Plaintiff: Allan Karanja Wathigo; Plaintiff: Nancy Mbitio; Plaintiff: Carolyne Wanjiku Waiyaki; Plaintiff: John Macharia; Plaintiff: Collins Nmbango Dennis; Defendant: National Land Commission; Defendant: Kenya National Highway Authority
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kitale
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
12 February 2020
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 46 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Injunction
Outcome
Application granted in terms of prayer (4); status quo to be maintained pending hearing and determination of the suit.
Judges
FM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition, Injunctive Relief, Status Quo Orders, Gazette Notice Requirements
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Compulsory Acquisition Injunctive Relief Status Quo Orders Gazette Notice Requirements

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel Kisoro Moiben

Plaintiff

Susan Wambui Ndirangu

Plaintiff

James Muriithi

Plaintiff

Samuel Wainaina Gitonga

Plaintiff

Joseph Muiruri

Plaintiff

Ibrahim Mohammed

Plaintiff

Gerald Njonge

Plaintiff

Allan Karanja Wathigo

Plaintiff

Nancy Mbitio

Plaintiff

Carolyne Wanjiku Waiyaki

Plaintiff

John Macharia

Plaintiff

Collins Nmbango Dennis

Plaintiff

National Land Commission

Defendant

Kenya National Highway Authority

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from compulsorily acquiring the entire Kenya Railways Block 4 for road construction.
  2. 2 Whether the acquisition process complied with statutory and constitutional requirements, including proper notice and necessity of the land acquired.
  3. 3 Whether the preservation of status quo is warranted pending the hearing and determination of the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case for the preservation of the status quo, as the respondents sought to compulsorily acquire a larger portion of land than was necessary for the road project, without proper notice or justification. The application was unopposed, and the plaintiffs demonstrated that only a small portion of the land was required for the public purpose, while the remainder was not needed. The court was satisfied that unless the status quo was preserved, the plaintiffs risked suffering irreparable harm that could not be adequately compensated by damages. Accordingly, the court granted the application in terms of prayer (4), ordering that the...

Court Disposition

Application granted in terms of prayer (4); status quo to be maintained pending hearing and determination of the suit.

Orders

  • The status quo prevailing as at 13/6/2019, when the suit was filed and before compulsory acquisition and possession, shall be preserved pending hearing and determination of the suit.
  • Costs of the application shall be in the cause.