Lemein & another v Leperes & 8 others (Environment and Land Petition E015 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2112 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court refused to lift status quo orders protecting occupied land, so possession stays as it was until the main petition is heard.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Applicability of Section 80 CPA and Order 45 CPR to review of orders in a constitutional petition
The provisions apply to fill lacuna where the Mutunga Rules are silent, following Wafula & 8 others v OCPD-Kwanza
Constitutional petitions are governed by the Mutunga Rules, but courts have frequently allowed use of Order 45 CPR and Section 80 CPA for review of judgments or orders. The court found that because the prayers sought review of orders issued by the same court, these provisions could apply even in a constitutional petition.
Whether the Applicants established grounds for review
No - no new evidence, no error apparent on the face of the record, and no other sufficient reason was demonstrated
The record showed the land was sold to the Petitioners in 2007, titles issued in 2012, and the land leased to John Kiragu Wambugu from 2017. The Vacation Notice of 7th August 2025 itself showed the Applicants were not in occupation. The substantive disputes (root of title, validity of the Tribunal award, enforceability of the 2009 decree under the Limitation of Actions Act) could only be determined at the trial of the main Petition.
What constitutes the status quo on the suit property
Occupation and possession by the Petitioners through their lessee John Kiragu Wambugu, prevailing before the Vacation Notice, is the status quo to be maintained
The Vacation Notice signed by the 7th Respondent showed that the lessee, not the Applicants, had been in occupation for 8 years. The court clarified that the status quo directed on 9th December 2025 relates to the physical land whether under the old or new registrations, and should preserve possession as it actually existed before the Vacation Notice.
Legal principles established
#- Review is an equitable remedy, not a right, and cannot be used to re-argue the merits or as a substitute for an appeal
- Although the Civil Procedure Act and Rules do not apply directly to constitutional petitions, they may be invoked to fill procedural lacuna where the Mutunga Rules are silent
- Status quo on the land means possession as it actually prevailed, which was occupation by the Petitioners' lessee
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion application dated 15th December 2025 is dismissed entirely with costs to the Petitioners/Respondents
- 2.The status quo prevailing before the Vacation Notice was issued, as directed on 9th December 2025, is maintained pending hearing and determination of the Petition
- 3.Parties are to refrain from filing numerous interlocutory applications and concentrate on preparation and prosecution of the main Petition
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice and Procedure Rules 2013 (Mutunga Rules); sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rules 1 & 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules invoked to fill procedural lacuna
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Lemein & another v Leperes & 8 others (Environment and Land Petition E015 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2112 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Constitutional Petition dated 7th October 2025 (Notice of Motion dated 15th December 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2112/eng@2026-04-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.