AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedKAPSABET ELCLA NO. E010 OF 2025· [2026] KEELC 4203 (KLR)
Telu & 3 others v Chumba & another (Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 4203 (KLR)
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min briefThe bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet froze the lower court's land judgment, keeping the current occupants in place until the appeal is heard.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#This is a ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet (Ongondo, J) in ELCLA No. E010 of 2025 on a Notice of Motion dated 6th November 2025 by four applicants/appellants seeking stay of execution of the judgment and decree delivered on 29th August 2025 in Kapsabet Chief Magistrate ELC No. 68 of 2029 (Chepkazi Chumba & David Cheruiyot Rugut vs Clementina Jelimo Telu & others), pending hearing of their appeal. The appeal, originally filed at Eldoret, had been transferred to Kapsabet. After hearing Mr. Mogambi for the applicants and Mr. Choge for the respondents, the court recorded that it was common ground the application be determined on terms to pave way for the hearing of the appeal. Noting that the memorandum of appeal raised triable issues including fraud and limitation of actions, and subscribing to the Court of Appeal decision in Butt v Rent Restriction Tribunal (1979) KECA 22 (KLR) that litigants are the best judges of their affairs and an appellant has an undoubted right of appeal, the court ordered status quo maintained over land parcel Nandi/Kaptel/1997: the four applicants to remain in occupation while the respondents were barred from transferring, selling, subdividing or disposing of the property pending the appeal. Execution of the lower court judgment and decree was stayed. The court made no orders as to costs, directed the appellants to file and serve the record of appeal within thirty days, and set the appeal for directions on 28th September 2026.
Key legal issues
#01
Whether to stay execution of the decree pending appeal
Holding
Stay granted by consent, with status quo maintained: applicants to remain in occupation and respondents barred from disposing of the land
Reasoning
The parties' counsel agreed the application be determined on terms paving way for the hearing of the appeal. The memorandum of appeal disclosed triable issues including fraud and limitation of actions. The court adopted the Butt v Rent Restriction Tribunal principle that a litigant has an undoubted right of appeal.
p. 2
Legal principles established
#- Stay pending appeal is granted to preserve the appeal; litigants and their advisors are best judges of their affairs and an appellant has an undoubted right of appeal
Court orders
#- 1.Status quo prevailing over land reference number Nandi/Kaptel/1997 to be maintained by the parties pending the outcome of the appeal
- 2.The four applicants to remain in occupation of the said property
- 3.The respondents not to transfer, sell, subdivide or dispose of the property pending the hearing and determination of the appeal
- 4.No execution of the judgment and decree in Kapsabet CMC ELC No. 68 of 2019 pending the outcome of the appeal
- 5.No orders as to costs
- 6.Learned counsel for the appellants to file and serve record of appeal within thirty days
- 7.Appeal set for directions on 28th September 2026
- On appeal from
- Chief Magistrate's Court, Kapsabet (Environment and Land)
- CMC ELC No. 68 of 2019 (Chepkazi Chumba & David Cheruiyot Rugut vs Clementina Jelimo Telu & others)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent appellate jurisdiction to grant stay of execution pending appeal (appeal transferred from Eldoret Environment and Land Court)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Telu & 3 others v Chumba & another (Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 4203 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). KAPSABET ELCLA NO. E010 OF 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4203/eng@2026-07-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.