Ngetich & another v National Government Constituency Development Fund Board & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E034 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 339 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The court refused a full temporary injunction over Nandi Hills land but froze all dealings and construction until the ownership dispute is finally decided.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicants made out a case to entitle them to a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from trespassing on, developing or dealing with the suit land pending the hearing and determination of the main suit
Key legal issues
#Whether the applicants were entitled to a temporary injunction against the respondents over the suit land
The application was partially allowed: instead of the temporary injunction sought, the court granted an interim preservation (status quo) order over the suit land pending the hearing and determination of the suit
The court considered the application under Order 40 of the Civil Procedure Rules and its power under section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act. Noting the issues were highly contested and that the parties' rights required protection for a fair trial, the court held that a status quo order preserving the suit land, rather than a full temporary injunction, was the appropriate interim remedy. The 3rd respondent having not responded, the application was partially unchallenged.
The court's power to grant interim preservation orders over land
The court has the mandate under section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2015 to grant interim preservation orders, including status quo orders, pending determination of the suit
Relying on Ogada v Mollin and Musa Angira Angira v ICDC, and reading Articles 50(1), 25(c) and 159(2)(b) of the Constitution with section 13(7)(a) of the ELC Act, the court held that preservation of the suit land was imperative for a fair trial of the suit and the ends of justice.
Legal principles established
#- An injunction is an equitable and discretionary remedy
- The applicant in an interlocutory injunction application must sequentially establish a prima facie case, irreparable injury, and that the balance of convenience lies in his favour
- Injunctive orders are meant to preserve property and maintain the status quo
- The Environment and Land Court has power under section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act to grant interim preservation orders, including status quo orders, over land pending determination of a suit
Court orders
#- 1.That the prevailing status quo over the suit land be maintained by the applicants and the respondents pending the outcome of this suit; the parties shall not sell, charge, transfer, sub divide, dispose of or alienate any portion of the suit land in any manner or erect any permanent structures thereon pending the hearing and determination of this suit
- 2.That the OCS Nandi Hills Police Station do secure compliance of this order
- 3.Costs of the application be in the cause
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2015; Order 40 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Relief refused
#Temporary injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into, building, developing and or dealing with the suit land pending the hearing and determination of the main suit
The court found a status quo preservation order, not a temporary injunction, was merited at this interim stage, particularly given the highly contested issues and the right to fair hearing
Costs
Costs of the application be in the cause
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
That the prevailing status quo over the suit land be maintained by the applicants and the respondents pending the outcome of this suit. In particular, the parties shall not sell, charge, transfer, sub divide, dispose of or alienate any portion of the suit land in any manner or erect any permanent structures thereon pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
Costs of the application be in the cause
It is my considered view that what is merited at this interim stage, is a status quo order rather than the temporary injunctive relief sought in the application, to preserve the suit land until the suit is heard and determined on merit or terminated;
This court has the mandate under section 13 (7) of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2015 (2011) to grant interim preservation orders over the suit land.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment cites the Land Registration Act as 'Land Registration Act 2016 (2012)' - an internally inconsistent date reference
The supporting affidavit is described as 'six paragraphs' in the judgment but the text is truncated and paragraph numbering is absent at the opening of the judgment
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ngetich & another v National Government Constituency Development Fund Board & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E034 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 339 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/339/eng@2026-01-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.