Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in judgment· [2026] KEELC 4255 (KLR)

Ole Kuronoi v Ole Kondonyo (Environment and Land Case E515 of 2017) [2026] KEELC 4255 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
9 July 2026
2,661 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan landowner lost his bid to swap a different land parcel into an eviction order, because court review only fixes clear errors, not new evidence.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Plaintiff/Applicant, David Rakoi Ole Kuronoi, moved the Environment and Land Court at Narok by Notice of Motion dated 3rd March 2026 seeking review of the judgment of 22nd March 2023, the decree of 31st March 2025, and the ruling of 19th December 2025. He sought, first, substitution of the OCS Duka Moja Police Station with the OCS Nairegie Enkare Police Station to provide security during eviction, because Duka Moja Police Post had no OCS; and secondly, review of the judgment to refer to parcel Cis-mara/Suswa Kitet/988, a title issued to him on 14th June 2023 after completion of adjudication, in place of Land Parcel No. Suswa Kitet Group Ranch 778. The application, though served, was unopposed. The court framed two issues: its jurisdiction to review, and costs. Holding that review jurisdiction is statutory under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court found the applicant had not met any recognized ground. The title deed constituted new evidence, not an error apparent on the face of the record; his complaint necessitated amendment of pleadings, impermissible at that stage; and no documentary trail proved the two parcels were identical. Substituting the parcel in an eviction decree would alter substantive rights and the scope of execution, and the proper course was a fresh suit. The application was dismissed entirely with no orders as to costs, the respondent having not participated.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the court has jurisdiction to review its judgment of 22nd March 2023 and ruling of 19th December 2025

Holding

The application for review failed; the applicant did not bring himself within the strict confines of Section 80 CPA and Order 45 Rule 1 CPR.

Reasoning

The court held that review jurisdiction is statutory and narrow. The applicant's production of a title deed for a different parcel (Cis-mara/Suswa Kitet/988) was new evidence, not an error apparent on the face of the record. The complaint necessitated amendment of pleadings, impermissible at that stage, and no documentary trail proved the two parcels were the same. The proper remedy was a fresh suit.

p. 5
02

Who bears the costs of the application

Holding

No orders as to costs, since the applicant failed and the respondent did not participate.

Reasoning

The court reiterated that costs follow the event, but the respondent having not participated, it declined to award costs against the respondent and made none at all.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • The jurisdiction to review is statutory and confined to the grounds in Section 80 CPA and Order 45 CPR; review cannot be used to introduce new evidence or amend pleadings after judgment
  • Substituting the land parcel in an eviction decree alters substantive rights and the scope of execution and is not a clerical error

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The instant Notice of Motion application dated 3rd March 2026 is found not merited and is dismissed entirely
  2. 2.No orders as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ole Kuronoi v Ole Kondonyo (Environment and Land Case E515 of 2017) [2026] KEELC 4255 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4255/eng@2026-07-09

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.