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

Nuclear Investment Limited v Nairobi County Government & 2 others (Civil Suit 393 of 2018) [2025] KEELC 722 (KLR) (18 February 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KEELC 722 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
722
Citation
[2025] KEELC 722 (KLR)
Decided
18 February 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCompensation and InjunctionPostureAppeal from a decision of the Environment and Land CourtCoramEK WABWOTO
Holding

The Plainti’s case has been successfully proved against the 1st and 3rd Defendants, and a permanent injunction is issued restraining the 1st Defendant from interfering with the Plainti’s property. Special and general damages are awarded, and costs are payable by the 1st Defendant.

Facts

Nuclear Investment Limited claimed compensation and an injunction against Nairobi County Government and Nairobi Metropolitan Services for illegal encroachment and demolition of their property. The 1st Defendant, Nairobi County Government, demolished the perimeter wall of the property on 3rd September 2018, causing damage and exposing the property to looters. The 2nd Defendant, National Land Commission, conducted a valuation of the property in April 2020, assessing its value at Kshs. 190,050,000/=.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plainti’s case against the Defendants has been proved to the required standard.
  2. Whether the Plainti is entitled to the reliefs sought.

Reasoning

The court found that the 1st Defendant violated the Plainti’s rights by demolishing the perimeter wall without notice or opportunity to be heard. The Plainti is the registered proprietor of the property, and the 2nd Defendant was not involved in the acquisition process.

Outcome

Partial success for the Plainti

Orders

  • A permanent injunction restraining the 1st Defendant from interfering with the Plainti’s property.
  • Special damages of Kshs. 1,295,000/= awarded to the Plainti.
  • General damages for trespass of Kshs. 1,000,000/= awarded to the Plainti.
  • Costs of the suit payable by the 1st Defendant.
  • Interest at court rates on item (b) from the date of filing suit until its payment in full.

Remedies

  • Permanent injunction
  • Special damages
  • General damages
  • Costs of the suit
  • Interest on special damages

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Land Act, 2012
  • Evidence 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.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case