[2023] KEELC 17030 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 17030 (KLR)

The court found that since the petition had been struck out on grounds of res judicata, there was no substantive matter remaining upon which to ground an injunction or stay order. The striking out order was not a positive order capable of execution, except as to costs, and thus there was nothing to stay. The court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 17030 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Peter Obungha Wakoyo & 87 others; Respondent: County Government of Mombasa; Respondent: County Secretary, County Government of Mombasa
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Petition 21'A' of 2022
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Petition / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondents
Judges
SM Kibunja
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Res Judicata, Eviction Proceedings, Stay of Execution
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunctions Res Judicata Eviction Proceedings Stay of Execution

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Obungha Wakoyo & 87 others

Applicant

County Government of Mombasa

Respondent

County Secretary, County Government of Mombasa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Petition / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the petitioners have made a reasonable case for the injunction order to issue pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal.
  2. 2 Who should bear the costs of the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that since the petition had been struck out on grounds of res judicata, there was no substantive matter remaining upon which to ground an injunction or stay order. The striking out order was not a positive order capable of execution, except as to costs, and thus there was nothing to stay. The court was functus officio and lacked jurisdiction to grant the substantive relief sought. The appropriate forum for any interim relief pending appeal would be the appellate court. Consequently, the application for injunction was without merit and was dismissed with costs to the respondents.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondents

Orders

  • The petitioners’ notice of motion dated August 27, 2020 is dismissed.
  • The petitioners to pay the respondents' costs.