Jane Ngonyo Muhia v Director General, National Environmental Management Authority & another [2017] KEELC 1204 (KLR)
- Court
- Environment & Land Court
- Case number
- 1204
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 1204 (KLR)
- Decided
- 13 October 2017
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppeal from a decision of the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) regarding the construction of a building on the suit propertyCoramS. Okongo B M Ebosso
Holding
The appeal is allowed, and the court orders the demolition of the two top floors of the building if not certified and approved for human inhabitation within 120 days.
Facts
The appellant started construction of a three-storey residential building without obtaining an Environmental Impact Assessment Licence from NEMA. NEMA stopped the construction and later approved the project with conditions, but the appellant did not comply with the conditions.
Issues
- Whether the appellant's construction of the building without an EIA Licence was in compliance with the law
- Whether the court should order the demolition of the two top floors of the building
Reasoning
The court found that the appellant's construction was illegal due to the lack of an EIA Licence and that the conditions set by NEMA were not met.
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Rulings of NEMA on 7th December, 2009 and 27th January, 2010 are set aside
- Two top floors of the building are not to be occupied or certified for human inhabitation within 90 days
- Appellant to apply for approvals and certification of the two floors by all relevant regulatory authorities
- If not implemented within 120 days, the two floors shall be demolished under the supervision of the relevant regulatory authorities
- Each party to bear their own costs of the appeal
Remedies
- Demolition of the two top floors of the building if not certified and approved for human inhabitation within 120 days
Authorities cited
Legislation (1)
- Environment and Land Court Act
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.
Loading judgment…