SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Francis Karumwa Gathekia v Kahindo Kataliko Kamungele & another [2015] KEELC 585 (KLR)

[2015] KEELC 585 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
585
Citation
[2015] KEELC 585 (KLR)
Decided
20 March 2015
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeInjunctionPostureAppeal from an original trial decisionCoramP. NYAMWEYA
Holding

The Plaintiff has met the threshold for the grant of temporary and mandatory orders of injunction.

Facts

The Plaintiff, Francis Karumwa Gathekia, filed an application for temporary and mandatory injunctions against the Defendants, Kahindo Kataliko Kamungele and Jason Paluku Kataliko Kamungele, due to damage to a boundary wall on their land.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiff has met the threshold for the grant of temporary and mandatory orders of injunction.
  2. What constitutes a prima facie case for the grant of temporary and mandatory injunctions.

Reasoning

The Court found that the Plaintiff established a prima facie case and would suffer irreparable loss which may not be compensated by an award of damages.

Outcome

Granted

Orders

  • That in default of the Defendants reconstructing or restoring to its original stable or strong position on the said boundary wall at all or within such a time as the Court will give, pending the hearing and determination of this suit, then the Plaintiff to reconstruct, or restore to its original stable or strong position the said boundary wall.
  • That the O.C.P.D Langata Police Division be empowered to provide security during the said reconstruction or restoration works.

Remedies

  • Reconstruction or restoration of the boundary wall
  • Security provided by the O.C.P.D Langata Police Division

Authorities cited

Cases cited (2)
  • Giella vs Cassman Brown & Co Ltd, (1973) EA 358
  • Kenya Breweries Ltd and Another v Washington Okeyo (2002) 1 E.A. 109
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case