Kenya Case Law

Jumaa & another (Suing as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Patrick Kwesha Dzombo (Deceased)) v Sanga & 2 others

Jumaa & another (Suing as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Patrick Kwesha Dzombo (Deceased)) v Sanga & 2 others [2025] KEELC 4982 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 166 of 2014

Judge

JO Olola

The court granted a partial stay of execution pending appeal, preserving the status quo on family land and staying selected judgment prayers.

• Stay Of Execution
• Family Land Disputes
• Rectification Of Title
• Possession And Eviction
• Stay-of-execution
• Family-land-disputes

Kinyua v Ranguma & 3 others

Kinyua v Ranguma & 3 others [2025] KEELC 4883 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment and Land Case E512 of 2024

Judge

JG Kemei

The court found the preliminary objection incompetent as it was not raised by notice of motion and required evaluation of contested facts, not a pure point of law. On the injunction, the applicant failed to demonstrate a prima facie case, as his claim to ownership was not supported by sufficient documentation linking the deceased to the suit land, and the respondents had longstanding possession. The applicant also failed to show irreparable harm, as any loss could be compensated by damages. Granting the orders sought would effectively determine the main suit without a hearing, violating natur…

Source excerpt

• Injunctive Relief
• Status Quo Orders
• Ownership Disputes
• Possession And Eviction

Wanjama v City Council of Nairobi & another

Wanjama v City Council of Nairobi & another [2025] KEELC 4929 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment and Land Appeal E033 of 2024

Judge

TW Murigi

The court found that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case with a probability of success, as the evidence showed a dispute over the existence and ownership of Plot No. H26B, while the respondent was in possession of Plot No. H99 pursuant to a judgment and execution. The court held that the conditions for granting an injunction, as set out in Giella v Cassman Brown, must be considered sequentially, and since the applicant did not meet the first condition, there was no need to consider irreparable harm or balance of convenience. The application for a temporary injunction pending…

Source excerpt

• Interlocutory Injunctions
• Prima Facie Case
• Ownership Disputes
• Possession And Eviction

Mutisya v Mumangi

Mutisya v Mumangi [2025] KEELC 2897 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment & Land Case E001 of 2023

Judge

NA Matheka

The court granted a temporary injunction because the applicant established a prima facie case based on land sale agreements, payment, and possession, and the balance of convenience favored maintaining the status quo pending the suit's determination.

Source excerpt

• Interlocutory Injunctions
• Land Sale Disputes
• Title Transfer
• Possession And Eviction

Lukorito v Siror

Lukorito v Siror [2025] KEELC 1348 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment & Land Case 26 of 2019

Judge

FO Nyagaka

The Environment and Land Court dismissed a renewed injunction application, holding it was res judicata because a similar request had already been decided between the same parties.

• Temporary Injunctions
• Res Judicata
• Land Sale Agreements
• Possession And Eviction
• Temporary-injunctions
• Res-judicata

Mwangi (Suing as Guardian ad litem of Julius Mwangi Kariuki) & another v Abdirashid & another

Mwangi (Suing as Guardian ad litem of Julius Mwangi Kariuki) & another v Abdirashid & another [2025] KEELC 3593 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment & Land Case 359 of 2024

Judge

JG Kemei

The court found that both the applicants and the 2nd respondent claim title to the same parcel of land, with both tracing their root of title to Itlaf Seyd. The applicants demonstrated long-term possession of over 20 years, payment of utilities, and documentary evidence of purchase and inheritance. The 2nd respondent's claim was based on a more recent purchase and an eviction order, but failed to establish a landlord-tenant relationship or prior possession. The court held that the applicants established a prima facie case with a probability of success, and that loss of family land and livelih…

Source excerpt

• Injunctive Relief
• Land Ownership Disputes
• Title Challenges
• Possession And Eviction

Musau v Shire

Musau v Shire [2025] KEELC 240 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment & Land Case E17 of 2024

Judge

A Nyukuri

A temporary injunction should be granted where the applicant demonstrates a prima facie case with chances of success, stands to suffer irreparable loss not compensable by damages, and the balance of convenience tilts in their favour. In this case, the apparent fraudulent nature of the defendant's documents, coupled with the plaintiff's registered ownership and possession, established a prima facie case for the plaintiff, warranting the injunction to prevent irreparable harm and preserve the suit property.

Source excerpt

• Temporary Injunctions
• Land Ownership Disputes
• Title Fraud
• Possession And Eviction

Kamore v Ndiritu & 2 others

Kamore v Ndiritu & 2 others [2024] KEELC 6497 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E001 of 2024

Judge

YM Angima

The court found that the Applicant failed to provide a reasonable or plausible explanation for the delay in filing the appeal. The delay attributed to obtaining a certified copy of the judgment was not justified, as such a document is not required to lodge an appeal. Even accepting the Applicant's explanation regarding the judgment, there was an unexplained further delay of two months. The Applicant's claim of caring for his mother was not substantiated beyond a four-day hospital admission, and there was no evidence of continuous incapacity. As the extension of time was not granted, the appli…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Time
• Stay Of Execution
• Appeals From Subordinate Courts
• Possession And Eviction

Eric Tipis Lesengeni, Michael Kantet Tipis, Benard Kantet Tipis and Serah Shiloo Tipis (Suing as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rodah Tipis - Deceased) v Umoja Developers Limited

Eric Tipis Lesengeni, Michael Kantet Tipis, Benard Kantet Tipis and Serah Shiloo Tipis (Suing as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rodah Tipis - Deceased) v Umoja Developers Limited [2024] KEELC 5453 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 1418 of 2014

Judge

AA Omollo

The court found that the sale agreement was in writing and signed, and that the defendant provided credible evidence, including a forensic report and corroborating documents, that the deceased executed the agreement and received payments towards the purchase price. The plaintiffs failed to prove that the signatures were forged or that the transaction was fraudulent, as their own evidence was inconsistent and did not rebut the defendant's documentary trail. The court accepted the defendant's explanation for the source of funds and the manner of payment, noting that the vendor's advocate confir…

Source excerpt

• Sale Of Land
• Title Transfer
• Fraud In Land Transactions
• Admissibility Of Expert Evidence
• Contract Execution
• Possession And Eviction

Kinagi v Talent International Community Organization; Wanjiku & 5 others (Interested Parties)

Kinagi v Talent International Community Organization; Wanjiku & 5 others (Interested Parties) [2024] KEELC 4793 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment and Land Appeal E002 of 2024

Judge

YM Angima

The court found that the Appellants failed to demonstrate substantial loss as required under Order 42 rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The evidence did not show that the Appellants would suffer irreparable harm or that the appeal would be rendered nugatory if a stay was not granted. The Respondent’s intended use of the property for a children’s home did not threaten the Appellants’ ability to regain possession should the appeal succeed, and there was no indication that the property would be alienated or rendered unavailable. The court further held that costs should be in the appeal, gi…

Source excerpt

• Stay Of Execution
• Substantial Loss
• Possession And Eviction
• Security For Due Performance