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

Thuo v Githinji (Environment and Land Appeal 97 of 2021) [2023] KEELC 20279 (KLR) (28 September 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEELC 20279 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
20279
Citation
[2023] KEELC 20279 (KLR)
Decided
28 September 2023
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeAppealPostureAppeal from the Ruling and Orders of Honourable C. Mburu, SRM in Ruiru MCELC No. 7 of 2021CoramJG KEMEI
The Appeal partially succeeds, and the Ruling of the trial Court is set aside to the extent that status quo is ordered in terms of prayer no 2 of the application dated February 9, 2021.

Facts

The Appellant, Daniel Njunga Thuo, sought an injunction against the Respondent, Amos Njunga Githinji, to prevent him from receiving Kshs 300,000 from the Appellant. The Respondent claimed that the Appellant had not accepted a refund for a loan agreement.

Issues

  • Whether the Appellant established a prima facie case for an injunction.
  • Whether the balance of convenience tilts in favor of granting status quo to preserve the suit land.
  • Whether the grounds of appeal are founded.

Reasoning

The Court finds that there was a transaction between the parties and that the Appellant has established a prima facie case with a probability of success. The balance of convenience tilts in favor of granting status quo to preserve the suit land.

Outcome

The Appeal partially succeeds.

Orders

  • Status quo be and is hereby ordered in terms of prayer no 2 of the application dated February 9, 2021.

Remedies

  • Preservation of the suit land pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case