Njeru (Suing as the Legal Representative and/or Substitute of the Late Rufus Njeru Kanambu) v Solomon (Environment and Land Case E077 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3156 (KLR)
The bottom line
#An Embu court paused eviction from family land pending appeal, but only after the appellant agreed to deposit Kshs. 100,000 as security within thirty days.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the conditions for stay of execution pending appeal were satisfied
Stay granted: application filed about one month after judgment was without unreasonable delay; substantial loss (eviction from family home) demonstrated; security fixed by the court at Kshs. 100,000/=.
The court applied the settled Order 42 Rule 6 thresholds. Delay of approximately one month from judgment to application was found timeous. The decree directly affected possession and execution would evict the Applicant from the family home, a prejudice not easily reversible if the appeal succeeded. Although the Applicant proposed no specific sum, security is discretionary, so the court fixed Kshs. 100,000/= with default lapsing the stay.
Whether a temporary injunction should issue
Declined; the status quo order sufficiently preserved the suit property pending appeal.
The court considered that a status quo order is intended to preserve the subject matter and prevent the appeal being rendered nugatory. Since occupation and use of the land remained contested between the parties, preservation of the prevailing state of affairs was the appropriate remedy, rendering a separate temporary injunction unnecessary.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant for stay of execution pending appeal under Order 42 Rule 6 must demonstrate application without unreasonable delay, substantial loss, and security for due performance of the decree.
- Where execution of a decree would result in eviction of the applicant and the prejudice could not be reversed if the appeal succeeds, substantial loss is demonstrated.
Court orders
#- 1.Stay of execution of the judgment, decree and all consequential orders issued in Runyenjes MCELC Case No. E020 of 2023 on 09/10/2025 pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.
- 2.The Applicant to deposit Kshs. 100,000/= as security for the due performance of the decree within thirty (30) days of the ruling, failing which the order of stay shall automatically lapse.
- 3.Parties to maintain the status quo obtaining as at the date of the ruling; neither party shall evict, dispossess, alienate, cultivate new portions, or otherwise deal with the suit property in any manner capable of altering its current condition.
- 4.Prayer for a separate order of temporary injunction declined.
- 5.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal.
- On appeal from
- Senior Resident Magistrate's Court, Runyenjes
- Runyenjes MCELC Case No. E020 of 2023
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 3A and 63(e) of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Njeru (Suing as the Legal Representative and/or Substitute of the Late Rufus Njeru Kanambu) v Solomon (Environment and Land Case E077 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3156 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Runyenjes MCELC Appeal (Memorandum of Appeal against judgment in Runyenjes MCELC Case No. E020 of 2023). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3156/eng@2026-05-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.