Lucy Wambui Thuo v Daniel Kibe
The bottom line
#A Kajiado court allowed a land case to proceed against a defendant who cannot be found, by serving him through a newspaper advertisement.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.whether the application is merited
Key legal issues
#Whether leave for substituted service should be granted
Application allowed; advertisement in a newspaper of nationwide circulation ordered
Order 5 Rule 17 confers a discretion to order substituted service where the court is satisfied that personal service on the defendant, his agent, or an adult family member residing with him is impossible after several attempts. Modes include affixing on conspicuous places and advertisement (sub-rule 4). The applicant demonstrated that the respondent's whereabouts and contact details are unknown, rendering personal service impossible.
Legal principles established
#- The sole requirement for substituted service under Order 5 Rule 17 is that the court be satisfied that summons cannot be served under the preceding rules
Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted for service of the originating summons by substituted service by way of a prominent advertisement in a newspaper of nationwide circulation within 21 days from the date of the ruling
- 2.The respondent to enter appearance and file his response within 21 days after service
- 3.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the case
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 13 and 19 of the Environment and Land Court Act; Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 5 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The sole requirement for the exercise of the court’s discretion under the rule is that the court must be satisfied that the summons cannot be served in accordance with the preceding rules.
Consequently, I allow the application for service of the originating summons by substituted service by way of a prominent advertisement in a newspaper of national wide circulation in the next 21 days from the date of this ruling.
The costs of this application shall abide the outcome of the case.
Issues in the judgment
#Order 5 rule 22B/22C discussion not carried through to the analysis
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Lucy Wambui Thuo v Daniel Kibe", Case Analysis (2026). ELC NO. E005 OF 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5572/eng@2026-09-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.