The law on injunctions is that the applicant must present a prima facie case with a probability of success in the main suit and show a likelihood of suffering irreparable damage if the injunction is denied. In considering the above principles, the court should bear in mind that temporary injunctions are discretionary orders and the court should not attempt to resolve issues related to the main suit. The applicants needed to prove that that the impugned property was in danger of being wasted or alienated and they would suffer irreparable damage if the injunction was not granted.
The respondents argued that the applicants would not be prejudiced or suffer irreparable damage if the court denied the injunction. The applicants were never evicted and were not in occupation since the land was currently occupied by refugees, among others. The facts of the case were unique and involved issues of national security and the settlement of refugees, which the latter concerned international and national obligations towards refugees.
Refugees; refugee rights; land interests; injunction; protection of interests in land; land used to house refugees; refugee settlement; refugee displacement; protecting settlement of refugees
The applicants applied for an injunction order pending a case already before the High Court. They sought orders to restrain the respondents from destroying their homes and crops and evicting them pending the hearing and determination of the main suit. The applicants managed to regain possession of the contested land, but refugees were still settled on part of the land. The land was established as a military barracks and refugee settlement.
The State threatened eviction and to settle more refugees on the land, which the applicants contended was unlawful because the land belonged to them. The threats of eviction have been occurring since 2013 and placed the applicants in states of fear and uncertainty.
Nothing was placed before the High Court to support ownership, but it was proved that the applicants occupied part of the land under customary tenure. This needed to be balanced against the need of the Government to accommodate its armed forces and refugees. The temporary injunction was granted to prevent the destruction of the applicants’ homes and crops, evicting them, or sanctioning new settlements for refugees. The Court also directed that the refugees already settled should remain until final determination of the main suit.
A prima facie case required that a court need only be satisfied that the applicant is required to show a probability of success in the main suit. An important principle that guided the High Court was that the purpose of an injunction was to preserve the status quo until the determination of the whole dispute.