The Court found that the applicant, having initiated the application for interlocutory relief and having filed a notice of appeal, conferred jurisdiction on the Court of Appeal to entertain the application under Rule 5(2)(b). The consent order was entered into by the parties to compromise the application, and there was no material evidence to support the applicant's claims of fraud or duress in procuring the consent. The grounds advanced for setting aside the consent were the same as those previously relied upon to obtain relief, and the applicant had already benefited from the consent, inclu…
Vector Projects Limited & Illumine International Limited v Sweetland Holdings Limited [2022] KEELC 379 (KLR)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Case number
Miscellaneous Application E195 of 2011
Judge
AW Mwangi
The court found that the preliminary objection raised by the respondent was a pure point of law, as it questioned the competence of contempt proceedings against a corporate entity. The court held that under section 5 of the Judicature Act and the applicable UK procedural rules, committal for contempt is directed at natural persons, not companies. Since the directors of the respondent company were not joined as parties in their personal capacities, and the applicants had not sought to lift the corporate veil, the application for committal to civil jail against the respondent company was fatall…
Adhar Khalil & Muhayid Kali v Fatuma Hussein Hassan [2022] KEELC 1231 (KLR)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Case number
Environment and Land Appeal E002 of 2021
The Environment and Land Court allowed an appeal against committal for contempt, finding the appellants were not heard before being jailed and setting aside the trial court’s orders.
Hadad M. Karukwa & Waweru Karukwa v John Mwago Kariuki [2021] KEHC 13183 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Appeal 380 of 1992
The court found that, following the Court of Appeal's decision in Christine Wangari Gachege v Elizabeth Wanjiru Evans and 11 Others (2014) eKLR, leave is not required to bring an application for committal for contempt where the alleged contempt relates to breach of a court order. The court also determined that the respondent had been properly served with the relevant order and motion, as evidenced by the affidavit of service. However, since the application before the court was solely for leave to apply for committal, and such leave is not required under the applicable law, the motion was dism…
The High Court found that the 1st Respondent failed to follow due process by dispensing with the ex-parte Applicant's application for review without a hearing, thereby violating the Applicant's rights under Articles 47 and 50 of the Constitution and Section 4 of the Fair Administrative Action Act. The court further held that the committal order exceeded the statutory maximum period under Section 101(7) of the Children Act and was issued without proper inquiry into the Applicant's financial position. As a result, the orders issued on 11/11/2019, 3/2/2020, and 13/2/2020 were null and void for p…
Sheet & Metal Works Limited v Ngigi Njuru & Nginu Powers Engineering (E.A) Limited [2017] KEELC 3279 (KLR)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Case number
? 1459 of 2014
The court dismissed an application to commit the 1st defendant for contempt, finding the status quo order unclear and not properly shown to be in force.
North Tetu Farmers Co. Ltd v Joseph Nderitu Wanjohi [2016] KEHC 7193 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Case 13 of 2014
Judge
JM Mativo
A contempt application failed because the applicant did not prove, to the required higher standard, that the respondent willfully breached the injunctive orders.
Republic v Governor Makueni County,Interim County Secretary Makueni Government & Makueni County Executive Exparte Applicant David Muimi Kakonzi [2015] KEHC 107 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Miscellaneous Application 121 of 2013
Judges
LN Mutende, P Nyamweya
The High Court dismissed a preliminary objection in a contempt application, holding that leave and notice to the Attorney General were not required under the applicable rules.