[2010] KEHC 2224 (KLR)

[2010] KEHC 2224 (KLR)

The court found that there was no sufficient evidence to prove that the defendant or the District Commissioner disobeyed the court orders of 16th December 2009. The closure of the plaintiff's business premises was attributed to the plaintiff's failure to renew the liquor licence and lack of sanitary facilities, as...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] KEHC 2224 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Wakari Njuguna; Defendant: Jason Kimani Mwangi; Respondent: Gerishon Mbogo Mathioya
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisii
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 270 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Contempt and Injunction
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the defendant and District Commissioner
Judges
DK Musinga
Legal Topics
Mandatory Injunctions, Contempt of Court, Distress for Rent, Licensing of Business Premises
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Mandatory Injunctions Contempt of Court Distress for Rent Licensing of Business Premises

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wakari Njuguna

Plaintiff

Jason Kimani Mwangi

Defendant

Gerishon Mbogo Mathioya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Contempt and Injunction

  1. 1 Whether the defendant and District Commissioner were in contempt of court orders issued on 16th December 2009.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant unlawfully interfered with the plaintiff's possession and use of the suit premises.
  3. 3 Whether the closure of the plaintiff's business premises was lawful.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no sufficient evidence to prove that the defendant or the District Commissioner disobeyed the court orders of 16th December 2009. The closure of the plaintiff's business premises was attributed to the plaintiff's failure to renew the liquor licence and lack of sanitary facilities, as required by law. The police, however, overstepped their authority by closing the business rather than limiting their actions to arrest and seizure as provided under the Liquor Licensing Act. Nonetheless, the evidence did not establish contempt of court by the defendant or the District Commissioner. The plaintiff's application for contempt was therefore dismissed with costs to...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the defendant and District Commissioner

Orders

  • The plaintiff's application to cite the defendant and District Commissioner for contempt is dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the defendant and to Mr. Gerishon Mbogo Mathioya.