Lois Holdings Ltd (Suing Through its Director Pamela Karambu Kimbui) v Kimbui & 3 others (Environment and Land Case E010 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3694 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused to award costs after a land suit was withdrawn following a family mediation settlement, so each side paid its own legal bills.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether costs should follow the event on withdrawal of a suit under Order 25 of the Civil Procedure Rules
No. Although the general rule is that costs follow the event under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, the court found legitimate reasons to depart from that rule where the withdrawal followed an amicable mediation settlement of the underlying family dispute, and each party was ordered to bear their own costs.
Order 25 permits withdrawal at any stage, and the plaintiff withdrew by notice dated 19/6/2025. The 1st defendant sought costs under Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, but the purpose of costs is compensatory, not punitive. The plaintiff was not a vexatious or frivolous litigant; the suit was withdrawn in good faith after a formal mediation settlement of the family succession dispute, from which the defendants benefited. Awarding costs would undermine the reconciliation achieved and fetter the court's constitutional mandate to encourage alternative dispute resolution. The court therefore found legitimate reasons to depart from the general rule.
Whether the withdrawal was made in good faith and without abuse of court process
Yes. The plaintiff was not termed a vexatious litigant, nor was the suit frivolous or an abuse of the court process; the withdrawal followed a formal settlement of the underlying family dispute at the High Court.
The parties were in agreement on the existence of Nairobi Milimani High Court P&A Cause No. 16 of 2018, which led to a mediation settlement in favour of all beneficiaries to the deceased's estate. The 1st defendant's replying affidavit admitted the succession cause and the directions referring the matter to mediation. Against that background, the plaintiff's withdrawal was found to be in good faith, pursuing reconciliation already achieved by the family, which justified denying the defendant's costs.
Legal principles established
#- The general rule is that costs follow the event under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, but the court may depart from it where there are legitimate reasons.
- The purpose of costs is to compensate a party who has prosecuted or defended a suit, not to punish the adversary.
- Imposing costs on a party after an amicable settlement through mediation would fetter the constitutional encouragement of alternative dispute resolution.
Court orders
#- 1.The suit, withdrawn by notice dated 19/6/2025 under Order 25 of the Civil Procedure Rules, stands marked withdrawn
- 2.Each party to bear their own costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court under the Civil Procedure Act and Order 25 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Lois Holdings Ltd (Suing Through its Director Pamela Karambu Kimbui) v Kimbui & 3 others (Environment and Land Case E010 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3694 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3694/eng@2026-06-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.