Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedKitale ELC No. 27 of 1999· [2026] KEELC 5039 (KLR)

Kipkoech v Lagat & 2 others (Environment and Land Case 27 of 1999) [2026] KEELC 5039 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
31 July 2026
GGG. M. Gitonga
923 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court corrected a clerical error in a 2023 land transfer order and authorised the Deputy Registrar to execute the transfer because the losing party refused to cooperate.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Kitale in a suit (ELC No. 27 of 1999) in which the plaintiff sought a declaration of ownership over LR No. Kaplamai/Sirende Block 4/Koitogos/28 and an eviction order. Judgment delivered on 16/9/2015 allowed the plaintiff's suit, but on 16/1/2018 the court on review set aside the eviction, holding the claim statute-barred under Section 7 of the Limitation of Actions Act, and dismissed the suit. The 2nd defendant subsequently obtained an order on 6/7/2023 compelling the plaintiff to execute transfer documents in respect of 5 acres, failing which the Deputy Registrar would execute them. That order erroneously referred to 6 acres instead of 5; an application to correct it dated 7/8/2023 was marked settled by consent after the plaintiff executed documents, but the plaintiff thereafter refused to cooperate. The 2nd defendant, by Notice of Motion dated 3/6/2026 supported by the affidavit of her advocate Aduke Lydia Koii, sought review of the 6/7/2023 order to read 5 acres and authority for the Deputy Registrar to execute the transfer in default. The plaintiff initially conceded but wanted a surveyor of his choice. The court, per G.M. Gitonga J, allowed the application in terms of prayers (2) and (3), made no orders as to costs, and directed delivery via Microsoft Teams/Open Court on 31 July 2026.

Key legal issues

#
01

Correction of an error apparent on the face of the record in a court order (acreage of land to be transferred)

Holding

The application for review was merited; the order of 6/7/2023 was varied to substitute 5 acres for 6 acres, and the Deputy Registrar was authorised to execute the transfer in default of the plaintiff.

Reasoning

The court perused the record, including the 2015 judgment and the ruling correcting an earlier error, and noted the matter had been in court since 1999. The plaintiff conceded the application, seeking only to include a surveyor of his choice. Given the plaintiff's reluctance to execute transfer documents, the court found review was the only way of executing the orders and allowed prayers (2) and (3).

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a party demonstrates reluctance to execute transfer documents that would allow the other party to enjoy the fruits of judgment, the court may authorise the Deputy Registrar to execute the documents.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The court reviewed the order issued on 6/7/2023 to read that the Deputy Registrar execute the documents in respect of the transfer of 5 acres of LR No. Kaplamai/Sirende Block 4/Koitogos/28 instead of 6 acres
  2. 2.In default of the plaintiff, the Deputy Registrar is authorised to execute the transfer documents to effect the transfer of the 5 acres in respect of LR No. Kaplamai/Sirende Block 4/Koitogos/28
  3. 3.No orders as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules (review jurisdiction)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kipkoech v Lagat & 2 others (Environment and Land Case 27 of 1999) [2026] KEELC 5039 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Kitale ELC No. 27 of 1999. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5039/eng@2026-07-31

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