Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in the extract· [2026] KEELC 1117 (KLR)

Chemutai (Suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of the Late Prisca Chepkong’a) v Chesiyna (Sued as the Legal Representative of the Estate of the Late Chebii Chesiyna Elijah - Deceased) & another (Environment and Land Case E003 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 1117 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
25 February 2026
LWL. N. Waithaka
1,570 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court dismissed a contempt application because the applicant's photos and affidavit failed to prove the other side had disobeyed a court order.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Busia (Waithaka J) determines a notice of motion dated 7th October, 2025 by the plaintiff, Lynn Chemutai, filed on the eve of the scheduled delivery of judgment. She sought stay of delivery of judgment, summoning of the defendants to show cause why they should not be committed to civil jail for contempt of an injunctive order issued by Odeny J on 31st January, 2019, and costs. The applicant alleged that the defendants entered the suit properties, Baringo/Sergonjun/1241 and Baringo/Sergonjun/2028, cleared the land for cultivation, and used hostile villagers to threaten her workmen, relying on photographs and her affidavit. The respondents, through the replying affidavit of the 1st defendant, Susan Kimosop Chesiyna, denied the allegations, contending that tree-cutting by third parties for firewood and charcoal was common, that the photographs could not be verified as depicting the suit properties, and that the application was a malicious ploy to stall judgment. In written submissions, the applicant relied on Kigio Group Company Limited v. Kibaara on contempt principles; the respondents relied on Cecil Miller, Econet Wireless, Teachers Service Commission and Sheila Cassatt Issenberg, urging that contempt applications must be watertight and compliant with the Judicature Act. Framing the sole issue as whether the applicant had made out a case for the orders sought, the court held that she had not proven trespass by the respondents or their agents in breach of the interim orders. The application was dismissed with costs to the respondents, and the pending judgment was directed to be delivered on 9th March, 2026.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the respondents were in contempt of the injunctive order issued on 31st January, 2019

Holding

Contempt not proven; the applicant's photographic and affidavit evidence did not establish trespass on the suit properties by the respondents or their agents

Reasoning

The court weighed the applicant's photographs and sworn affidavit against the respondents' rebuttal that tree-cutting by third parties was common, and found the applicant had not proven breach of the interim orders restraining interference with the suit properties. Failure of proof on this central issue disposed of the whole application.

p. 4
02

Whether delivery of the judgment scheduled for 8th October, 2025 should be stayed pending purging of alleged contempt

Holding

Refused; the application having failed on contempt, no basis existed to defer judgment

Reasoning

The stay of judgment was premised on the alleged contempt. Since contempt was not proven, the foundation for deferring delivery of judgment fell away, and the court fixed a new date for delivery of the pending judgment.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A party seeking contempt orders must prove, to the applicable standard, that the respondents or persons acting on their authority breached the court order

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 7th October, 2025 is dismissed with costs to the respondents
  2. 2.The pending judgment to be delivered on 9th March, 2026
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent powers of the court to punish contempt of its orders (Judicature Act cited by parties)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Chemutai (Suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of the Late Prisca Chepkong’a) v Chesiyna (Sued as the Legal Representative of the Estate of the Late Chebii Chesiyna Elijah - Deceased) & another (Environment and Land Case E003 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 1117 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the extract. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/1117/eng@2026-02-25

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