Oil Com (K) Limited v Muriungi; Rurigi t/a Quick Line Auctioneers (Applicant) (Miscellaneous Application E019 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 2965 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court confirmed auctioneers cannot evict anyone without a court eviction order; an eviction notice alone is not enough.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether an auctioneer can levy eviction on the strength of an eviction notice and advocate's instructions without a court eviction order
An auctioneer can only proceed to levy eviction where there is a lawful court order; an eviction notice under Sections 152E and 152F of the Land Act is not an eviction order, and non-compliance with such a notice does not itself amount to an eviction order.
The court held that an eviction order can only issue following determination of a substantive suit by the proprietor or lawful agent. The applicant had no eviction order, none was exhibited, and the applicant confirmed its absence. Relying on the Court of Appeal in Gusii Mwalimu Sacco, the court held that self-help recovery of possession would amount to the law of the jungle and offend due process and Article 50(1) of the Constitution.
Procedural requirements for procuring an eviction order and compliance with the Auctioneers Rules
The proper route is a substantive suit under Section 19 of the Civil Procedure Act read with Order 3 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, not a miscellaneous application; further, non-compliance with Rule 12 of the Auctioneers Rules on notification vitiated the intended execution.
The court noted the applicant sought to enforce an advocate's letter dated 02.01.2026 through a miscellaneous application, which is impermissible since an eviction order is a substantive order. Additionally, the applicant produced no evidence of the notification required under Rule 12 of the Auctioneers Rules upon receipt of instructions, a failure the Court of Appeal in Lakeland Motors highlighted as negating and vitiating intended actions.
Proof of ownership and trespass
Although it was contended that the instructing client (Oilcom Kenya Limited) was the registered owner of the suit property, no evidence of registration was exhibited, and the alleged trespass was not proven.
The court observed that no certificate of title or other evidence of the instructing client's registered ownership of LR No. Isiolo Township/Block 4/88 was annexed. It also held that the contention that the respondent was a trespasser had not been proven. In the absence of such proof, a court cannot issue eviction orders on the basis of assumption or speculation.
Legal principles established
#- An auctioneer may only levy eviction where a lawful court order of eviction exists; an eviction notice and an advocate's letter of instructions do not constitute an eviction order.
- An eviction order is a substantive order which can only issue from a court of law following determination of a substantive suit, and cannot be inferred or imagined.
- Recovery of vacant possession, even from a trespasser, cannot be achieved without an order of a competent court.
- Courts do not issue orders, particularly eviction orders, on the basis of assumption, speculation or hypothesis; ownership must be proved.
Court orders
#- 1.The Application dated 08.04.2026 be and is hereby struck out.
- 2.No orders as to costs.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, Chapter 21 Laws of Kenya; Order 50 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010; Rule 7(2) of the Auctioneers Rules 2009
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Oil Com (K) Limited v Muriungi; Rurigi t/a Quick Line Auctioneers (Applicant) (Miscellaneous Application E019 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 2965 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Miscellaneous Application dated 08.04.2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2965/eng@2026-05-14
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.