Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedEnvironment and Land Appeal E014 of 2014· [2023] KEELC 18838 (KLR)

Odongo & 3 others v Onyango

Environment and Land Court
19 July 2023
1,418 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

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court halted eviction from disputed ancestral land, confirming parties can freely choose new lawyers when filing an appeal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay (GMA Ongondo, J) determined the appellants' notice of motion dated March 31, 2023 seeking stay of execution of the judgment in Ndhiwa MCELC/E023/2021 delivered on March 7, 2023, pending the hearing and determination of their appeal. The applicants, dissatisfied with the trial judgment awarding the respondent parcels Kanyamwa/Kabonyo/Kwandiku/1945 and 1576, argued the appeal was arguable and that they faced eviction from ancestral land, rendering the appeal nugatory. The respondent opposed on two grounds: that the applicants' advocate was improperly on record contrary to order 9 rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, and that no consent or order to file appeal had been obtained. The court framed two issues: whether the appeal offended order 9 rule 9, and whether the order 42 rule 6(1)(2) requirements for stay were met. On the first, the court held order 9 rule 9 applies to change of advocates after judgment in the original suit, not to a new appeal where a party has a constitutional right to counsel of choice under articles 48, 50(1) and 25(c). On the second, it found substantial loss (eviction from ancestral land), no unreasonable delay, and willingness to abide by terms, reinforced by the court's power under section 13(7)(a) of the Environment and Land Court Act to issue interim preservation orders. The application was allowed with stay granted pending appeal; costs were ordered to abide the appeal's outcome.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the appeal and application are improperly before the court for want of compliance with order 9 rule 9

Holding

Order 9 rule 9 does not apply; this is a new appeal in which the applicants have a right to counsel of their own choice, and both parties were represented by counsel on record.

Reasoning

The court held order 9 rule 9 governs change of advocate after judgment in the original suit. An appeal is a new matter, and the right to legal representation of one's choice is protected under articles 48, 50(1) and 25(c) of the Constitution, so the objection fails.

p. 3
02

Whether the applicants satisfied the requirements for stay of execution under order 42 rule 6(1)(2)

Holding

The applicants satisfied substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay and willingness to abide by terms, so stay was granted.

Reasoning

The applicants risked eviction from ancestral land rendering the appeal nugatory; the appeal and application were filed without unreasonable delay; and the applicants offered to abide by any terms as security. The court also invoked its power under section 13(7)(a) of the ELC Act to issue interim preservation orders.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Order 9 rule 9 on change of advocate does not apply to a new appeal, where a party has a right to counsel of own choice
  • Stay of execution may be granted to preserve the subject matter of an appeal pending determination of contested issues

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Stay of execution of the judgment in Ndhiwa Principal Magistrate's Court Environment and Land Case Number E023 of 2021 granted pending the hearing and determination of the appeal
  2. 2.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 42 rule 6(1)(2)
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 9 rule 9
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 9 Rules 1 and 5 or 6
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 50
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 48, 50(1) and 25(c)
  • Environment and Land Court ActSection 13(7)(a)

Cases cited (5)

  • Francis Omondi Odhiambo v Hippolitus Omondi Ochieng
    [2022] eKLR
  • Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Company Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd
    [1989] EA 696
  • Butt v Rent Restriction Tribunal
    (1979) eKLR

    The appellant has an undoubted right of appeal; special circumstances rendering appeal nugatory.

  • Vishram Ravji Halai and another v Thornton & Turpin [1963 Ltd]
    [1990] KLR 365

    Stay of execution is within the court's inherent jurisdiction.

  • Board of Governors Moi High School Kabarak and another v Malcolm Bell
    [2013] eKLR

    Interim preservation orders preserving subject matter pending appeal.

On appeal from
Ndhiwa Principal Magistrate's Court (Environment and Land)
MCELC/E023/2021
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 42 rule 6(1)(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010; section 13(7)(a) of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2015

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Odongo & 3 others v Onyango", Case Analysis (2023). Environment and Land Appeal E014 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/18838/eng@2023-07-19

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