Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealDismissedRule 5(2)(b) application dated 18th November, 2025 (intended appeal from Thika ELC Case No. 292 of 2018)· [2026] KECA 1403 (KLR)

Ruth Wambui & 1 other v Therdrous Chege Kinuthia

Court of Appeal of Kenya
10 July 2026
1,591 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

#

The Court of Appeal refused to protect two landowners from a rival transaction because their proposed appeal had no real chance of succeeding.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a routine Rule 5(2)(b) application before the Court of Appeal at Nairobi in which Ruth Wambui and Teresia Wanjiku sought an injunction restraining Therdrous Chege Kinuthia from dealing with LR. No. Thindigua 76/748 pending an intended appeal against a ruling of Mogeni J in Thika ELC Case No. 292 of 2018 dated 8th October 2025, which dismissed their application for review of an earlier ruling by Gacheru J of 23rd July 2020 declining to set aside a 2015 decree adopted from a Kiambu Land Disputes Tribunal award of 7th January 2010. The litigation had a protracted history since 2009, with the applicants having failed to appeal the Tribunal award, the magistrate's adoption of it, or the 2020 ELC dismissal. The applicants contended that the Land Disputes Tribunal lacked jurisdiction over ownership of the suit property. The Court applied the settled principles in Stanley Kang'ethe Kinyanjui v Tony Ketter, holding that the applicants had not demonstrated an arguable appeal because the ELC decision under challenge was a narrow ruling on review, not the broad jurisdictional question framed in the proposed grounds of appeal. Having failed on the first limb, the Court found it unnecessary to consider whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory. The application dated 18th November 2025 was dismissed with costs to the respondent. The judgment is a single judgment of the full bench, delivered at Nairobi on 10th July 2026.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the applicants had an arguable appeal against the dismissal of their application for review

Holding

The intended appeal was not arguable; the proposed jurisdictional grounds were too broadly framed and the ELC decision under challenge was a narrow one on review of a discretionary dismissal.

Reasoning

The court distinguished the intended appeal's broad jurisdictional framing from the actual narrow question decided by Mogeni J, namely review of the July 2020 dismissal of the applicants' 2018 application to set aside the 2015 decree adopted on the Tribunal award. Having failed to appeal the earlier decisions, the applicants could not resuscitate those issues through review. The court therefore found no arguable appeal and declined to consider nugatory-ness.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • The Rule 5(2)(b) test requires the applicant to sequentially demonstrate both an arguable appeal and that it would be rendered nugatory; where the arguability limb fails, the nugatory limb need not be considered.
  • The Court has wide and unfettered discretion under Rule 5(2)(b) to grant stay or injunction on just terms, but only upon satisfaction of the established twin principles.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Dismissal of the applicants' application dated 18th November, 2025
  2. 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondent
On appeal from
Environment and Land Court, Thika
ELC Case No. 292 of 2018
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules (injunction/stay pending appeal)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ruth Wambui & 1 other v Therdrous Chege Kinuthia", Case Analysis (2026). Rule 5(2)(b) application dated 18th November, 2025 (intended appeal from Thika ELC Case No. 292 of 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1403/eng@2026-07-10

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