Odek v Nyang’oro (Environment and Land Appeal E019 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 2710 (KLR) (7 May 2026) (Ruling)

Odek v Nyang’oro (Environment and Land Appeal E019 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 2710 (KLR) (7 May 2026) (Ruling)

The application failed because none of the statutory grounds for review was shown, the court was functus officio in respect of the non-appealed lower court judgment, and non-payment of thrown-away costs is not a basis for review. The proper remedy was execution for costs, not review.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEELC 2710 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Vitalis Kenge Odek; Respondent: Odera Nyang’oro
Court
Environment and Land Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal E019 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Application for Review After Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Judges
["E Asati"]
Legal Topics
Review of Judgment, Functus Officio, Execution for Costs, Unopposed Application, Setting Aside Ex Parte Judgment
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Environment and Land Law Appellate Practice Review of Judgment Functus Officio Execution for Costs Unopposed Application Setting Aside Ex Parte Judgment

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vitalis Kenge Odek

Appellant

Odera Nyang’oro

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Appeal / Application for Review After Appeal Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the court had jurisdiction to review the appeal judgment and reinstate the lower court default judgment
  2. 2 Whether failure to pay thrown-away costs is a valid ground for review
  3. 3 Whether the applicant satisfied the statutory grounds for review under the Civil Procedure Act and Rules

Ratio Decidendi

The application failed because none of the statutory grounds for review was shown, the court was functus officio in respect of the non-appealed lower court judgment, and non-payment of thrown-away costs is not a basis for review. The proper remedy was execution for costs, not review.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for review dismissed
  • No order as to costs because the application was unopposed