Misoi & another v Misoi (Environment and Land Case 385 of 2012) [2026] KEELC 559 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Eldoret court refused to undo a land settlement consent judgment, holding that inconvenience in carrying it out is not a legal ground to set it aside.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Grounds for setting aside a consent judgment
A consent judgment may be vacated only by a fresh consent of the parties or on grounds equivalent to those for rescinding a contract - fraud, collusion or agreement contrary to the policy of the court. Mere inconvenience in implementation does not suffice.
The Court adopted the test in The Board of Trustees National Social Security Fund v Michael Mwalo (2015) eKLR, which restates the established law that courts will not interfere with consent judgments except in circumstances that would justify varying or rescinding a contract. The Applicants pleaded only that implementation of the decree would attract stamp duty and fresh litigation with an untraceable third party. The Court held this alleged inconvenience was for the parties to surmount in the pursuit of justice and fell far short of the required grounds, none of which were pleaded or proved.
Merits of the Application
Having failed on the substantive ground for setting aside the consent judgment, the Application lacked merit in its entirety.
The Court reasoned that the fate of the Application followed directly from its finding on Issue No. 1. Since the Applicants had neither pleaded nor proved fraud, collusion or an agreement contrary to the policy of the court, and the only ground advanced was implementation inconvenience, the prayers - including reopening the suit, injunctions and variation of the judgment - could not be granted. The Respondent's position that the consent was regular, valid, binding and just was accepted, the Applicants having filed no supplementary or further affidavit to rebut the Replying Affidavit.
Legal principles established
#- A consent judgment may be set aside only on grounds similar to those for rescinding or varying a contract, namely fraud, collusion, or an agreement contrary to the policy of the court, or by the parties' own consent.
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion Application dated 15.08.2025 be and is hereby dismissed forthwith
- 2.The Applicants are condemned to pay the costs thereof to the Respondent herein
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction of the High Court and Order 45 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 (application for review/setting aside of consent judgment)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Misoi & another v Misoi (Environment and Land Case 385 of 2012) [2026] KEELC 559 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Eldoret High Court Case No. 162 of 2007 (consolidated with Eldoret High Court Case No. 82 of 1996). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/559/eng@2026-02-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.