Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedELC Suit Number 166 of 2015 (advocate/client Bill of Costs application dated 8th July 2025)· [2026] KEELC 4780 (KLR)

Kashaha v Registrar of Titles (Environment and Land Case 166 of 2015) [2026] KEELC 4780 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
24 July 2026
2,998 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Mombasa court allowed an advocate to attach his clients' land before judgment to secure legal fees they appeared set to defeat by selling parcels.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Mombasa (Ombwayo J) on an application dated 8th July 2025 by Stephens Kithi Ngombo, the plaintiffs' advocate in ELC Suit No. 166 of 2015 (originally Mombasa High Court Constitutional Petition No. 4 of 2013), seeking attachment before judgment over parcels in the Kilifi/Mtwapa-Maweni Settlement Scheme registered in the individual names of his former clients, as security for fees in a pending advocate/client taxation. The advocate deponed that following a consent judgment adopted by the court, the respondents were allotted subdivisions of a 500-acre suit property in the run-up to the 2022 General Elections, obtained title deeds, and were actively selling their parcels on the open market; he valued the land at approximately KShs. 30 billion and feared no attachable assets would remain upon issuance of a Certificate of Taxation. The application was unopposed. The court restated that attachment before judgment under section 63 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 39 of the Civil Procedure Rules is a rare and severe remedy requiring clear proof of intent to defeat justice, and since it is harsh, is not granted easily. Finding the applicant had demonstrated that the respondents were disposing of the properties and were likely to avoid settling the decree, the court granted an order of attachment before judgment over the listed parcels and awarded the costs of the application to the applicant. The alternative charge prayer was not expressly determined.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the threshold for attachment before judgment under section 63 CPA and Order 39 CPR was met

Holding

The threshold was met; the court found the respondents were disposing of the properties and likely to avoid settling the decree, and granted attachment before judgment over the listed parcels

Reasoning

The court restated the legal requirements: the applicant must show clear proof that the defendant intends to obstruct or delay a future decree, or is about to remove property from the court's reach. The applicant's supporting affidavit deponed that the respondents had obtained title deeds after subdivision pursuant to a consent judgment and were actively selling their parcels on the open market, with no other attachable assets within jurisdiction. The application was unopposed. On that material the court was satisfied that the respondents were disposing of the property and would likely avoid settling the decree.

Legal principles established

#
  • Attachment before judgment is a rare and severe interim remedy governed by section 63 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 39 of the Civil Procedure Rules, granted only on proof of intent to defeat justice
  • Because attachment before judgment is a harsh step, courts do not grant it easily and require solid evidence that the defendant intends to obstruct or delay realization of a decree

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order for attachment before judgment of all those parcels of land registered in the individual names of the Plaintiffs/Clients/Respondents whose names appear in the Authority To Appear and Plead first filed with the Petition/Plaint dated 23rd January 2013, being the listed Kilifi/Mtwapa-Maweni Settlement Scheme parcels
  2. 2.Costs of the application awarded to the applicant
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 63 of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21) and Order 39 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kashaha v Registrar of Titles (Environment and Land Case 166 of 2015) [2026] KEELC 4780 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELC Suit Number 166 of 2015 (advocate/client Bill of Costs application dated 8th July 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4780/eng@2026-07-24

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