Farah & 2 others v Adan (Environment and Land Case E131 & E136 of 2021 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELC 8394 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land court refused to disqualify a judge on bias claims, ruling the defendant's allegations were vague, unsupported, and apparently aimed at delaying the trial.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the trial Judge should recuse herself on grounds of apparent bias
Application for recusal dismissed; the Defendant failed to discharge the burden of establishing circumstances giving rise to a real possibility of bias
The court applied the fair-minded and informed observer test from Republic v Export Processing Zones Authority and Philip K. Tunoi. It found the Judge had only mentioned the matter once, never denied the Defendant audience, and that the Defendant himself sought adjournments and failed to proceed with the defence case. The application was also near-identical to an earlier recusal application against Justice Omange, indicating a pattern of delaying tactics rather than genuine apprehension of bias.
Legal principles established
#- A party seeking recusal for bias must specifically allege and establish facts showing that a reasonable, objective and informed person would apprehend that the judge will not bring an impartial mind to bear on the case
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion application dated 25th September 2025 is dismissed with costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction over the suit matter; application under Regulation 21(d) of the Judicial Service (Code of Conduct and Ethics) Regulations, 2020 on judicial recusal
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Farah & 2 others v Adan (Environment and Land Case E131 & E136 of 2021 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELC 8394 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/8394/eng@2025-12-02
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.