Koskey & 3 others v Sigei (Suing as the legal administrator of the Estate of Michael Kipsige Too - Deceased) (Environment and Land Appeal E073 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 1281 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nakuru court halted eviction from disputed land pending appeal, but only because the buyers promised to file their appeal record within 45 days.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the application for stay was competent despite the appeal being against a ruling declining to set aside the judgment rather than against the judgment itself
The court held the application competent, reasoning that success in the appeal would set aside the underlying judgment and thereby affect the decree, so there was a legal nexus between the appeal and the decree sought to be stayed
The Respondent argued the only appeal was against the ruling of 30th October 2025 declining to set aside the judgment, and that a negative order could not be stayed. The court rejected this, holding that if the appeal succeeds it will essentially set aside the lower court's judgment, and if it fails the Respondent will execute. An appeal against a ruling declining to set aside an ex-parte judgment therefore has a nexus to the decree.
Whether the Applicants demonstrated substantial loss to justify stay under Order 42 Rule 6(2)
The court found substantial loss demonstrated by the Applicants' occupation of the suit land and the risk of eviction, and held it in the interests of justice to grant stay conditional on filing a record of appeal within 45 days
The Applicants deponed they purchased the suit land, are in occupation with their families, and face eviction if stay is refused. The court, balancing the rights of the successful litigant against the appellant's right of appeal as guided by RWW v EKW, found that eviction would amount to substantial loss and that justice favoured granting stay, conditioned on expeditious filing of the record of appeal.
Legal principles established
#- The purpose of stay of execution pending appeal is to preserve the subject matter so the appeal is not rendered nugatory, while balancing the appellant's right of appeal against the successful litigant's right to enjoy the fruits of judgment
- Where the appeal is against a ruling declining to set aside an ex-parte judgment, the appeal, if successful, will set aside the underlying judgment, so the decree is capable of being stayed
Court orders
#- 1.Stay of execution of the judgment delivered on 29th February, 2024 and the decree issued on 27th September, 2024 in Molo ELC No. E030 of 2023, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal
- 2.The Appellants to file a record of appeal within 45 days failing which the order of stay lapses
- 3.Costs of the application to abide by the outcome of the appeal
- On appeal from
- Senior Principal Magistrate's Court, Molo
- Molo ELC No. E030 of 2023
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 42 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, in exercise of appellate jurisdiction over the subordinate court
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Koskey & 3 others v Sigei (Suing as the legal administrator of the Estate of Michael Kipsige Too - Deceased) (Environment and Land Appeal E073 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 1281 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Nakuru ELC Land Appeal No. E073 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/1281/eng@2026-03-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.