MR. GITIRIKU WAINAINA and MRS. GITIRIKU WAINAINA v. KENAFRIC INDUSTRIES and MANIL INDUSTRIES. País/Territorio Kenya Tipo de la corte Otros Fecha May 24, 2007 Fuente UNEP, InforMEA Nombre del tribunal National Environment Tribunal at Nairobi Sede de la corte Nairobi Juez Kanairu, D.Mumma, J.Stanley, S.Njihia, J. Idioma Inglés Materia Desechos y sustancias peligrosas, Medio ambiente gen. Palabra clave Efluente de aguas (residuales industriales) Efluente de aguas residuales/vertido Normas sobre calidad ambiental Sustancias peligrosas Control de la contaminación EIA Resumen This matter commenced as a civil suit filed in the High Court of Kenya, where the Judge ordered that the suit be transferred to the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA). The plaintiffs sought an Injunction against the defendants from operating their business on a piece of land adjacent to the plaintiffs own, until they put a stop to and or controlled Liquid waste, Chemicals and Noxious waste that flowed onto the plaintiffs property. They also sought Damages for the effects of the same as well as loss of rent due to the inhabitability of affected sections of the property. The Defendants denied causing the discharge of offensive and pestilential gases causing a nuisance; causing the discharge of harmful waste; causing flooding of, or damage to the plaintiffs premises; or being negligent. They also argued that their factory was in an area designated for light industrial use and that the City council of Nairobi planning permission for the construction of the factory. In constructing a block of flats for residential use the volenti non fit injuria principle was applicable and therefore the plaintiffs were estopped from complaining. The Tribunal found that the plaintiffs did not adduce sufficient evidence in support of Mr. Wanainas evidence regarding lost rent and therefore declined to award compensation for the same. The Tribunal also stated that the area in which the properties were found was designated for mixed residential and light industrial use, therefore the principle of volenti non fit injuria did not apply. The Tribunal however found that the defendants were liable for the damage suffered by the plaintiffs as a result of the corrosion on the roofing of the plaintiffs block of flats and further ordered that they pay Kshs. 354,000/- as compensation for the same.