[2008] KEHC 399 (KLR)

[2008] KEHC 399 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated the clear and exceptional circumstances required for the grant of a mandatory interlocutory injunction. The applicant failed to show a prima facie case, as the respondent was the registered proprietor of the suit premises and had executed a lawful eviction...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] KEHC 399 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Syrup Distributors Limited; Respondent: Loki Developers Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
16 December 2008
Case Number
Civil Appeal 166 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Mandatory Injunction Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
GG Okwengu
Legal Topics
Mandatory Injunctions, Execution of Decrees, Vacant Possession, Temporary Occupation Licence, Prima Facie Case
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Land and Property Mandatory Injunctions Execution of Decrees Vacant Possession Temporary Occupation Licence Prima Facie Case

Source-derived case record

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Syrup Distributors Limited

Appellant

Loki Developers Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Mandatory Injunction Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has satisfied the conditions for grant of a mandatory interlocutory injunction pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the execution of the eviction order was irregular due to lack of notice to show cause.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has demonstrated a prima facie case for reinstatement and restoration of structures.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated the clear and exceptional circumstances required for the grant of a mandatory interlocutory injunction. The applicant failed to show a prima facie case, as the respondent was the registered proprietor of the suit premises and had executed a lawful eviction order. No stay of execution had been obtained, and any irregularity in execution procedure was a matter for the trial court. The applicant's claims of loss or theft did not amount to irreparable harm justifying the extraordinary remedy sought. Consequently, the application for a mandatory injunction was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for a mandatory interlocutory injunction is dismissed.