Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment

Kenya Builders & Concrete Company Ltd v Mukabana (Suing as administrator of the Estate of the Late Peter Keya Were) (Environment and Land Case 1001 of 2013) [2026] KEELC 4186 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
7 July 2026
1,415 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A decade-old court injunction protecting Nairobi land still stands, and police have been ordered to enforce it against trespassers.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a first-instance interlocutory ruling by the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi in a long-running land dispute over L.R. No. 7086 (Original No. 6825/1) Mihango, Embakasi, Nairobi. Following status quo orders of 13th November 2025, the Plaintiff filed a Notice of Motion dated 11th December 2025 seeking an injunction restraining the Defendant from entering or trespassing on the suit property pending determination of that application, and an order compelling the OCPD Embakasi to enforce court orders. The Plaintiff, through its Managing Director Dinesh Premji Patel, claimed registered ownership since 1990 and alleged that on 10th December 2025 the Defendant mobilised an armed gang of over fifty people to invade the land. The Defendant disputed the Plaintiff's title, relying on a conveyance allegedly transferring the property to Peter Keya Were (deceased) and contending the Plaintiff's root of title was a non-existent company. Applying Giella v Cassman Brown, the court noted that Justice Mutungi had, by Ruling of 24th October 2014, already granted an interlocutory injunction restraining the Defendant from interfering with the suit property, and that these orders had never been shown to be set aside. Finding the application merited but the instant prayer spent, the court directed the parties to comply with the orders of 24th October 2014 and directed the OCPD Embakasi or OCS Kayole Police Station to enforce them. Costs were awarded in the cause. Judgment delivered virtually at Nairobi on 7th July 2026 by Christine Ochieng, J.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the Plaintiff has met the threshold for grant of an interlocutory injunction restraining the Defendant from trespassing on L.R. No. 7086 (Original No. 6825/1), Mihango

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Plaintiff met the Giella v Cassman Brown threshold for an interlocutory injunction against trespass

Holding

The application was merited, but since the injunction sought was spent, the court directed compliance with the earlier subsisting injunction orders of 24th October 2014 and ordered police enforcement

Reasoning

The court noted the Plaintiff had previously obtained an injunction through Justice Mutungi's Ruling of 24th October 2014 restraining the Defendant from entering, trespassing upon or demarcating the suit property. That order had not been shown to be set aside. The instant prayer, being limited to pending determination of the application, was spent. The court therefore found the application merited and directed compliance with, and police enforcement of, the 2014 orders.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a court has already granted an interlocutory injunction and the orders have not been set aside, the parties must comply with those orders and police may be directed to enforce them

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Parties directed to comply with the Orders issued on 24th October 2014 restraining interference with the suit property
  2. 2.The OCPD, Embakasi Division or OCS Kayole Police Station directed to enforce the Orders issued on 24th October 2014
  3. 3.Costs in the cause

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction over the suit property (L.R. No. 7086 (Original No. 6825/1) Mihango, Embakasi, Nairobi); no specific provision cited in the judgment

Relief refused

#

Interlocutory injunction sought pending determination of the instant application

The prayer was framed to operate only pending determination of the application itself and was therefore spent; the court instead directed compliance with the subsisting orders of 24th October 2014

p. 3

Costs

Costs will 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.

From a perusal of the prayer above, it is clear that the Court had already granted an interlocutory injunction restraining the Defendant from interfering with the suit property pending outcome of the suit. The Defendant has not indicated whether the said Orders were ever set aside.
p. 3Subsistence of prior injunction orders
I find the instant Notice of Motion application merited but since the Orders are already spent, I direct that parties should comply with the Orders issued on the 24th October, 2014, which I have cited above. I further direct that the OCPD, Embakasi Division or OCS Kayole Police Station to enforce the said Orders issued on the 24th October, 2014.
p. 3Final orders and police enforcement

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The judgment refers to orders of non-interference issued on 13th November 2025 and describes the Defendant as having 'extracted' and misconstrued them, but the substance of those orders is not reproduced

minor

Narrative inconsistency: the affidavit states the gang invaded the suit land on 10th December 2025 and 'promised to stage a come-back, which they did on 10th December 2025'

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Builders & Concrete Company Ltd v Mukabana (Suing as administrator of the Estate of the Late Peter Keya Were) (Environment and Land Case 1001 of 2013) [2026] KEELC 4186 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4186/eng@2026-07-07

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.