[2018] KEELC 1668 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 1668 (KLR)

The court found that there was a valid court order issued on 27th June 2017 and served on the respondent and his associates. The affidavit of service and photographs annexed to the application demonstrated that the order was served and that construction continued in defiance of the order. The respondent and his...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 1668 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Umoja Central Company Limited; Respondent: John Njenga; Respondent: Peter Irungu; Respondent: Simon Mwangi Ngure
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 395 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application / Ruling
Outcome
Application for contempt allowed. Respondent and associates found in contempt of court.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Injunctive Orders, Service of Process, Enforcement of Court Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Contempt of Court Injunctive Orders Service of Process Enforcement 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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Umoja Central Company Limited

Applicant

John Njenga

Respondent

Peter Irungu

Respondent

Simon Mwangi Ngure

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application / Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the respondent and his associates were served with a valid court order requiring them to stop construction on the disputed properties.
  2. 2 Whether there was wilful disobedience of the court order by the respondent and his associates.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has met the threshold for committal for contempt of court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was a valid court order issued on 27th June 2017 and served on the respondent and his associates. The affidavit of service and photographs annexed to the application demonstrated that the order was served and that construction continued in defiance of the order. The respondent and his associates did not file any response or appear to contest the application. The court was satisfied that the applicant had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the three contemnors were in contempt of court. The court therefore ordered their arrest and presentation before the court for further action in accordance with the law.

Court Disposition

Application for contempt allowed. Respondent and associates found in contempt of court.

Orders

  • The three contemnors, John Njenga, Peter Irungu, and Simon Mwangi Ngure, shall be arrested with the assistance of the OCS of the police station with jurisdiction over the area where the suit properties are situated.
  • Upon arrest, the three contemnors shall be brought to court on any working day to be dealt with in accordance with the law.