Ndambuki v Wambua & 2 others (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 120 of 2015) [2025] KEELC 7314 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused to stay execution of taxed costs, confirming that a dismissal judgment—a 'negative order'—leaves nothing that can be stayed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether costs flowing from a judgment that issued only negative orders can be stayed pending appeal
The motion for stay was dismissed because the underlying judgment issued negative orders; there is nothing to stay.
Order 42 Rule 6(2) principles require substantial loss, unreasonable delay absence and security. However, the court's judgment of 26/07/2023 merely dismissed the plaintiff's suit save on costs, amounting to a negative order. Following Western College and Jennifer Akinyi Osodo, negative orders are incapable of execution and hence incapable of stay, so the stay application fails without engaging the substantive tests.
Legal principles established
#- A negative order, such as the dismissal of a suit, is incapable of execution and therefore incapable of being stayed, save perhaps for costs
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion dated 17/12/2024 is dismissed
- 2.Each party to bear their respective costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ndambuki v Wambua & 2 others (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 120 of 2015) [2025] KEELC 7314 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the ruling (post-judgment notice of motion dated 17/12/2024; related reference ELCLMISC/E023/2024 Machakos). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7314/eng@2025-10-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.