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

Gathuo & another v Mwangi & 3 others (Miscellaneous Application 5 of 2020) [2021] KEELC 4744 (KLR) (13 May 2021) (Ruling)

[2021] KEELC 4744 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
4744
Citation
[2021] KEELC 4744 (KLR)
Decided
13 May 2021
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeMiscellaneous ApplicationPostureAppeal from a previous judgmentCoramYM ANGIMA
Holding

The court found that the status quo orders were not clearly defined and that the disobedience was not deliberate. Therefore, the applicants' application for contempt was dismissed.

Facts

The applicants and respondents were parties in two consolidated suits. The applicants sought an interim injunction, which was denied. The applicants then filed an application for contempt of court, alleging disobedience of status quo orders.

Issues

  1. Whether the 1st and 2nd respondents have disobeyed the status quo orders made on February 7, 2020.
  2. If the answer to (a) is in the affirmative, whether the 3rd and 4th respondents abetted and aided the 1st and 2nd respondents in its disobedience.
  3. If the answer to (a) and (b) is in the affirmative, what punishment should be meted out to the respondents.
  4. Who shall bear costs of the application.

Reasoning

The court agreed with the applicants that the court has jurisdiction to entertain an application for contempt of a court order, but the disobedience was not clearly defined and deliberate.

Outcome

The application for contempt was dismissed.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Judicature Act (cap 8)
  • Civil Procedure (Amendment No 2) Rules, 2012 of England and Wales
Cases cited (2)
  • Ochino & Another Okombo & 4 others [1989] eKLR
  • Alex Ngarachu Njenga & 2 others v Kenya Electricity Transmission Co Ltd Nyahururu ELC Appeal No 14 of 2020 (unreported)
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case