Lagat & another v Murei (Environment and Land Case 34 of 2020) [2025] KEELC 7023 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Eldoret Environment and Land Court refused to lift stay orders protecting landowners pending appeal, confirming delays caused by courts shouldn't punish litigants.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the stay of execution order should be vacated for want of a lodged appeal
The application failed. The delay was caused by the court's non-supply of typed proceedings, the appeal has since been lodged (COACA No. E066 of 2025), and setting aside the stay would render the appeal nugatory. Further, the application ought to have been made in the appellate court under Order 42 Rule 6(1).
The court found the Plaintiffs diligently sought certified proceedings from July 2023 with repeated reminders, so delay was not attributable to them. They had a right to pursue their appeal, which was lodged. The stay preserved the subject matter pending appeal, and eviction would render it nugatory. The Defendant's application also offended Order 42 Rule 6(1), which vests jurisdiction over setting aside stay orders in the appellate court.
Costs of the application
Although costs normally follow the event and the Defendant lost, the court declined to condemn him to costs, noting the application arose from his vigilance in seeking the fruits of his judgment.
Under section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act costs follow the event, but the discretion must be exercised judiciously in light of the parties' conduct and the ends of justice. The application was necessitated by the delayed lodgement of the appeal, though the delay was the court's fault. Penalising the unsuccessful Defendant would punish his vigilance, so no costs were ordered.
Legal principles established
#- A ground of delay in obtaining typed proceedings is not automatically a panacea for delay, but where the delay is attributable to the court and not the party, the party is not penalised.
- A person aggrieved by a stay order made by the trial court should apply to the appellate court to have it set aside under Order 42 Rule 6(1).
Court orders
#- 1.The Defendant/Applicant's Notice of Motion Application dated 28th January, 2025 is dismissed.
- 2.There shall be no orders as to costs.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court; application brought under Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Order 42 Rule 6(1)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Lagat & another v Murei (Environment and Land Case 34 of 2020) [2025] KEELC 7023 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7023/eng@2025-10-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.