Ali v Ibrahim (Suing as administrator and legal representative of the Late Sebit Abdalla Sebit) & another (Civil Appeal (Application) E133 of 2025) [2026] KECA 720 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal refused to pause a ruling cancelling a Nakuru land title because the planned appeal showed no serious, arguable grounds.
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 applicant has demonstrated that he has an arguable appeal
- 2.Whether the appeal, if arguable, will be rendered nugatory unless an order staying execution of the judgment and decree of the ELC is issued
Key legal issues
#Whether the applicant demonstrated an arguable appeal for purposes of Rule 5(2)(b)
The court found none of the grounds of appeal disclosed a bona fide arguable ground when measured against the judgment appealed from.
The court examined the memorandum of appeal against the trial judgment. The trial court had found the plaintiff proved her case on a balance of probabilities, noting the second defendant failed to explain how two distinct plots were issued under the same serial number and how a person joining the company in 2008 ended up with title to plot 1260. Without delving into the merits, the appellate court was not persuaded the grounds were arguable.
The nature of the Court's jurisdiction on a Rule 5(2)(b) application
The jurisdiction is original and discretionary, wide and unfettered, exercised on the basis of what is just, and does not constitute an appeal from the trial court's exercise of discretion.
Relying on established authority, the court restated that stay applications are decided on whether it is just to do so, that the court becomes seized only after a notice of appeal is filed, that each case depends on its own facts, and that a single bona fide arguable ground suffices - an arguable ground need not necessarily succeed but must be one that ought to be fully argued.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant under Rule 5(2)(b) must satisfy the twin principles of an arguable appeal and that the appeal will be rendered nugatory absent stay.
- The jurisdiction under Rule 5(2)(b) is original and discretionary, not an appeal from the trial court's exercise of discretion, and a single bona fide arguable ground suffices.
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 12th November, 2025 is dismissed with costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
- Nakuru ELC Suit No. 229 of 2018
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022
Relief refused
#Stay of execution of the judgment and decree of the ELC delivered on 10th June 2025 pending the hearing and determination of Civil Appeal No. E133 of 2025
The applicant failed to demonstrate any bona fide arguable ground of appeal; the twin principles under Rule 5(2)(b) were not satisfied
Costs
The application dated 12th November, 2025 is dismissed with costs (costs awarded to the respondents)
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.
the applicant has to meet the twin principles; whether the appeal is arguable and whether the application will be rendered nugatory absent stay.
a single bona fide arguable ground of appeal is suficient and an arguable is not one that must necessarily succeed but one which ought to be fully argued
Accordingly, the application dated 12th November, 2025 is without merits and is hereby dismissed with costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The citation for Halai & Another v Thorton & Turpin is internally garbled, appearing as '[1993] Ltd [1990] KLR 365', combining two inconsistent years and citations
The judgment recites the respondent's contention that the applicant failed to show 'the appeal is not arguable', which as worded would favour the applicant and appears to be a drafting slip for 'the appeal is arguable'
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ali v Ibrahim (Suing as administrator and legal representative of the Late Sebit Abdalla Sebit) & another (Civil Appeal (Application) E133 of 2025) [2026] KECA 720 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Application No. E133 of 2025 (stay application pending Civil Appeal No. E133 of 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/720/eng@2026-04-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.