[2023] KEELC 157 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 157 (KLR)

The court determined that, in order to preserve the subject matter of the appeal and prevent the risk of the suit land being disposed of or otherwise dealt with, it was necessary to grant interim preservation orders. The court relied on its statutory powers under the Environment and Land Court Act and the Civil...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 157 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Joseph Ochilo Were; Respondent: Edward Oganga Mbori (Suing as the legal representative of the Estate of the Late Isaac Mbori Oyugi)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal E008 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Interlocutory Ruling on Preservation Orders and Compliance With Stay of Execution
Outcome
Interim preservation orders granted; directions issued for filing and service of record of appeal; consequences for non-compliance specified.
Judges
GMA Ongondo
Legal Topics
Interim Preservation Orders, Stay of Execution, Record of Appeal Filing, Suit Land Alienation, Compliance With Court Orders
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Interim Preservation Orders Stay of Execution Record of Appeal Filing Suit Land Alienation Compliance With Court Orders

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Ochilo Were

Appellant

Edward Oganga Mbori (Suing as the legal representative of the Estate of the Late Isaac Mbori Oyugi)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Appeal / Interlocutory Ruling on Preservation Orders and Compliance With Stay of Execution

  1. 1 Whether interim preservation orders should be granted to prevent disposal or alienation of the suit land pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant should be compelled to file and serve the record of appeal within a specified period.
  3. 3 Whether non-compliance with court orders should result in dismissal of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that, in order to preserve the subject matter of the appeal and prevent the risk of the suit land being disposed of or otherwise dealt with, it was necessary to grant interim preservation orders. The court relied on its statutory powers under the Environment and Land Court Act and the Civil Procedure Act, as well as relevant precedent, to direct that the parties comply with the existing stay of execution and to prohibit any sale, alienation, charging, transfer, subdivision, or erection of permanent structures on the suit land pending further orders. The court further ordered the appellant to file and serve the record of appeal within 21 days, failing which the appeal...

Court Disposition

Interim preservation orders granted; directions issued for filing and service of record of appeal; consequences for non-compliance specified.

Orders

  • Parties to comply with the order of stay of execution of judgment granted on December 19, 2022.
  • Parties shall not sell, alienate, charge, transfer, subdivide or erect permanent structures on LR No Central Kasipul/Kanuma/1875 pending further orders.