[2012] KEHC 1362 (KLR)

[2012] KEHC 1362 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success, as there was evidence of overpayment and the defendant's failure to transfer the suit premises despite receiving consideration. The defendant's claims regarding the failure to pay for shares and other expenses were not sufficiently substantiated to rebut the plaintiff's assertions. The court held that if the injunction was not granted, the plaintiff risked suffering irreparable loss through possible disposal of the suit premises by the defendant. The contested issues regarding contract performance and variation were best left for determination at the full hearing. Accordingly, the court...

Citation
[2012] KEHC 1362 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Stephen Gitau Njoroge; Defendant: George Ngure Kariuki
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
31 October 2012
Case Number
Civil Suit 22 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted conditionally.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Interlocutory Injunctions, Sale of Land, Contract Variation
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Specific Performance Interlocutory Injunctions Sale of Land Contract Variation

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Gitau Njoroge

Plaintiff

George Ngure Kariuki

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case with a probability of success to warrant the grant of an interlocutory injunction.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favours the grant of an interlocutory injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success, as there was evidence of overpayment and the defendant's failure to transfer the suit premises despite receiving consideration. The defendant's claims regarding the failure to pay for shares and other expenses were not sufficiently substantiated to rebut the plaintiff's assertions. The court held that if the injunction was not granted, the plaintiff risked suffering irreparable loss through possible disposal of the suit premises by the defendant. The contested issues regarding contract performance and variation were best left for determination at the full hearing. Accordingly, the court...

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted conditionally.

Orders

  • An interlocutory injunction is issued in terms of prayer 3 of the Notice of Motion dated 4th February, 2012, restraining the defendant from disposing of the suit premises pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
  • The plaintiff shall, within seven (7) days from the date of this ruling, execute an undertaking as to damages in the sum of Kshs. 500,000/=.