AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2025] KEELC 5792 (KLR)
Saleri v Chief Land Registrar & another (Land Case E009 of 2025) (Environment and Land) [2025] KEELC 5792 (KLR)
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min briefThe bottom line
#A Kenyan land buyer in Taveta won a court order stopping eviction and sale of his plots until the full case is heard.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#This was a ruling of the Environment and Land Court on the Plaintiff/Applicant's notice of application dated 14th May 2025 seeking a temporary injunction restraining the Respondents from evicting, selling, alienating or dealing with Plot Nos. Taveta/Taveta Scheme Phase I/595 and numerous others listed, pending the hearing and determination of the suit. The Applicant deposed that he and Vincent Juma Loseghu had purchased the land from John Shiundu Okumu in December 2000, who in turn had bought it from the Director, Agro Development Company Ltd, but that the Respondents had since allocated the suit plots and issued title deeds to strangers unknown to the Applicant's family. The Respondents opposed the application through grounds of opposition dated 20th June 2025, contending that no prima facie case was established, that the Applicant came to court with unclean hands, and that statutory proceedings under the Land Adjudication Act, including consent of the land adjudication officer, had not been complied with. After hearing oral submissions from Mr. Odhiambo for the Applicant and Mr. Ponda for the Respondents, the court framed a single issue: whether the Applicant had made out a case for a temporary injunction. Applying the Giella v Cassman Brown test and the definition of a prima facie case in Mrao Ltd v First American Bank, the court found it undisputed that the Applicant was in possession, had produced the sale agreement and had fenced the plots, and held that a prima facie case was established. The court issued a temporary injunction restraining the Respondents from interfering with the suit parcels, directed substituted service within 14 days, ordered the Respondents to file their defence and witness statements within 21 days of the newspaper advertisement, set a pre-trial conference for 23rd September 2025, and ordered each party to bear their own costs of the application.
Key legal issues
#01
Whether the Applicant established a prima facie case for temporary injunction
Holding
A prima facie case was established: the Applicant's possession, the sale agreement and evidence of fencing upon purchase were not disputed.
Reasoning
The court applied the Giella v Cassman Brown three-limb test. It found undisputed evidence that the Applicant was in possession of the suit parcels, had produced the sale agreement evidencing purchase, and had fenced the plots on purchase. On that material, the court was satisfied a right had apparently been infringed, satisfying the first limb; the application was found merited and injunctive relief issued pending trial.
p. 3
Legal principles established
#- An injunction is a discretionary equitable remedy which must be exercised judiciously.
- A prima facie case in civil cases is more than an arguable case; the evidence must show an infringement of a right and probability of success at trial.
Court orders
#- 1.Temporary injunction issued restraining the Respondents, their servants and/or agents, from evicting, interfering with the Applicant's quiet enjoyment of and/or selling, alienating or in any manner dealing with the listed Plot Nos. Taveta/Taveta Scheme Phase I pending the hearing and determination of the suit
- 2.Order to be served by way of substituted service within 14 days
- 3.Respondents to file and serve their defence, witness statements and any other documents for trial within 21 days from the date of service of the Newspaper Advertisement
- 4.Matter listed for pre-trial conference on 23rd September 2025
- 5.Each party to bear own costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land within Taita Taveta County (provision not expressly cited)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Saleri v Chief Land Registrar & another (Land Case E009 of 2025) (Environment and Land) [2025] KEELC 5792 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5792/eng@2025-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.