Mwaniki v Nzomo (Environment and Land Case 70 of 2008) [2026] KEELC 419 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the court is functus officio after judgment and execution
The court held it was functus officio and lacked authority to issue the demolition orders sought.
Relying on Telkom Kenya Ltd v John Ochanda and the Supreme Court's approval of Pretorius in Odinga v IEBC, the court explained that once a final decision is given it is final and conclusive and cannot be revoked or varied by the decision-maker, subject to the slip-rule exception in Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act. Since the plaintiff had already executed the judgment and eviction order on 16/03/2025, the alleged re-entry by the defendant was a new cause of action for trespass which could not be remedied in the concluded suit. The court therefore dismissed the motion.
Legal principles established
#- A court that has delivered final judgment and whose decree has been executed becomes functus officio and cannot grant fresh substantive orders; a re-entry onto land after execution is a new cause of action for trespass, not a matter for reopening.
Court orders
#- 1.The motion dated 15/11/2024 is dismissed
- 2.The plaintiff to bear his own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 3A and 63(e) of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21; Order 40 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Section 18 of the Land Registration Act No. 3 of 2012 (as invoked in the motion)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mwaniki v Nzomo (Environment and Land Case 70 of 2008) [2026] KEELC 419 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Environment and Land Case 70 of 2008. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/419/eng@2026-02-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.