Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherNotice of Motion dated 11th November 2025· [2025] KEELC 8372 (KLR)

Nyando Farmers Company Limited v Kabutie Farmers Limtied & 4 others (Environment and Land Petition E001 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 8372 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
25 November 2025
GOG. M. A Ongondo
350 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court allowed a landowner to withdraw an application for conservatory orders over Songhor land, confirming parties can freely withdraw cases before hearing.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Applicant, through Felix Oketch and Company Advocates, moved the Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet by a Notice of Motion dated 11th November 2025 seeking principally conservatory orders against the Respondents in respect of land parcel LR No. 1462/1 Songhor in Nandi County, pending the outcome of a petition of even date. Before the application was responded to, counsel for the Applicant sought to withdraw it so that directions could be given for the expeditious hearing of the main petition. Counsel for the 4th Respondent, who had only just entered appearance, raised no objection, noting instructions for a response had not been given; counsel for the 3rd and 5th Respondents likewise did not oppose, the application never having been served on her clients. The court held that the choice to withdraw a matter before court cannot as a general rule be taken away from a party, applying the Supreme Court decisions in Council of Governors vs Senate & another and Asanyo & 3 others vs Attorney General. It further observed that withdrawal would facilitate the hearing of the petition in the spirit of Article 159(2)(b) of the Constitution, that justice shall not be delayed. The application was accordingly marked as withdrawn with no orders as to costs, leaving the conservatory relief sought undetermined and the parties free to pursue directions in the main petition.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a party may withdraw an interlocutory application before it is heard

Holding

Yes; the right to withdraw an application is the party's and cannot generally be denied, and withdrawal here served expeditious hearing of the main petition

Reasoning

The court held that withdrawal of a matter is a party's choice that cannot as a general rule be taken away, citing Supreme Court authority. The application was unopposed by the 3rd, 4th and 5th Respondents and had not been responded to. Withdrawal also served the constitutional imperative under Article 159(2)(b) that justice shall not be delayed, by paving way for hearing of the main petition.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A party's choice to withdraw a matter before court cannot, as a general rule, be taken away from that party
  • Justice shall not be delayed, per Article 159(2)(b) of the Constitution

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 11th November 2025 is hereby marked as withdrawn with no orders as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 159(2)(b) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Nyando Farmers Company Limited v Kabutie Farmers Limtied & 4 others (Environment and Land Petition E001 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 8372 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Notice of Motion dated 11th November 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/8372/eng@2025-11-25

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