[2008] KEHC 278 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case that the defendants, as co-directors, were acting without proper authority in seeking to dispose of the company property. The court clarified that the status quo order was specifically intended to prevent further demolition of the property, not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2008] KEHC 278 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Wilson Ndungu & 36 Others; Defendant: Jerome Wangombe & 5 Others
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 220 of 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Interlocutory Application (ruling on Injunction)
- Outcome
- Interim injunction restraining disposal of property and further demolition maintained until next mention date.
- Judges
- DK Maraga
- Legal Topics
- Injunctive Relief, Company Directors Disputes, Disposal of Company Property, Status Quo Orders
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Wilson Ndungu & 36 Others
Plaintiff
Jerome Wangombe & 5 Others
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Interlocutory Application (ruling on Injunction)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendants should be restrained from disposing of the company property without the authority or consent of the plaintiffs.
- 2 Whether the status quo order relates to demolition or disposal of the property.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case that the defendants, as co-directors, were acting without proper authority in seeking to dispose of the company property. The court clarified that the status quo order was specifically intended to prevent further demolition of the property, not its disposal, as there was already an injunction restraining disposal. The court held that it would be dishonest for the defendants to claim otherwise. The court therefore maintained the existing orders: restraining disposal of the property and prohibiting any further demolition until the matter is mentioned again in court.
Court Disposition
Interim injunction restraining disposal of property and further demolition maintained until next mention date.
Orders
- No further demolition of the suit property by the defendants, the Municipal Counsel of Nakuru, or any other party until the next mention date.
- Existing order restraining disposal of the property to remain in force until further orders of the court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
11 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU
Civil Case 220 of 2000
WILSON NDUNGU & 36 OTHERS……….…… PLAINTIFFS
VERSUS
JEROME WANGOMBE & 5 OTHERS.………DEFENDANT
RULING
In this Originating Summons (OS) the plaintiffs who are directors of Thengenge Enterprises Ltd (the Company) allege that the first, second, third and fourth defendants who are co-directors are, without their authority and/or consent, in the process of disposing the Company property known as Title No. Nakuru Municipality Block 5/105 by way of a lease to the 6th defendant. They have sought in this OS an order to restrain the defendants from disposing of the property.
Along with the filing of this OS they filed a chamber summons seeking inter-alia the same order. When the matter first came before me on the 22nd October 2008 I issued an ex-part injunction to restrain the disposal of the property and fixed the application for hearing on 5th November 2008. On that date the matter was adjourned to be given a date in the registry and extended the interim orders until the next hearing date. Before the matter could be fixed for inter parte hearing counsel for the plaintiff came back to court and complained that the defendants had started demolishing the property. I granted an order that the status quo to be maintained. Cleary that status quo order related to any further demolition of the property and not its disposal as there was already an order restraining that. It is therefore dishonest for the defendant to claim that the status quo order related to the disposal of the property. Until this matter is mentioned on the 17th December 2008 there should be no further demolition of the suit property by either the defendants, the Municipal Counsel of Nakuru or anybody else for that matter.
DATED and delivered at Nakuru this 9th day of December 2008.
D. K. MARAGA
JUDGE