Kakuzi PLC v National Land Commission & 8 others (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E026 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 4157 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land court refused to pause a National Land Commission decision, ruling that all three legal conditions for a stay must be met together, and the applicant met only one.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction and functus officio
The Court has jurisdiction under Section 19(2) of the ELC Act read with Order 42 rule 6 to entertain the stay application, and is not functus officio since stay of execution does not reopen the case
The Court held its jurisdiction springs from Section 19(2) of the Environment and Land Court Act, which binds it to the Civil Procedure Act procedure. Because the motion seeks stay of execution pending appeal rather than reopening the dismissed leave application, it does not offend finality of litigation, and the Court retains power to consider stay despite having dismissed leave.
Whether the Applicant satisfied the Order 42 rule 6(2) conditions
The Applicant satisfied only the no-unreasonable-delay condition, failing to prove substantial loss and to offer security; all three conditions must be met together
The Court found no tangible evidence linking Respondents to the alleged invasions of the suit land, so substantial loss was not proved. However, the motion was filed within ten days of the ruling of 27-4-2026, satisfying the delay condition. The Applicant made no mention of security or commitment to compensate the Respondents or expedite the appeal, failing the third conjunctive condition.
Stay where no substantive proceedings pending
Having dismissed leave for judicial review, the Court could not lawfully issue further orders in the Applicant's favour; the ruling was a negative order and no stay can be granted
The Court reasoned that once it became certain leave ought not to issue, it could no longer lawfully issue orders in the Applicant's favour. With no suit pending and the ruling of 27-4-2026 amounting to a finding of no cause of action, granting stay would be improper and would in effect suspend the 1st Respondent's determination through a collateral process.
Legal principles established
#- The three conditions for stay of execution under Order 42 rule 6(2) are conjunctive and not disjunctive
- No stay can issue where there is no pending suit, the court having dismissed leave for judicial review
Court orders
#- 1.The motion dated 4-5-2026 (amended 17-6-2026) is dismissed
- 2.Costs to the Respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 19(2) of the Environment and Land Court Act (Act No. 19 of 2011); Order 42 rule 6 and Order 51 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kakuzi PLC v National Land Commission & 8 others (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E026 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 4157 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in judgment (notice of motion dated 4-5-2026, amended 17-6-2026). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4157/eng@2026-07-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.