The Court of Appeal dismissed an application to amend the record of appeal, finding it was a reactive and vague attempt that amounted to abuse of process.
The High Court in Busia granted anticipatory bail after finding repeated informal DCI summonses across multiple stations amounted to harassment and abuse of process.
Olang’ v Chimba & another (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E048 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 5352 (KLR) (31 August 2026) (Ruling)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Case number
Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E048 of 2026
Judge
["EK Wabwoto"]
The court struck out an adverse possession suit and interim injunction application, holding the matter was an abusive attempt to relitigate issues already determined.
Thuo. & another v Attorney General & 5 others (Constitutional Petition E017 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 13175 (KLR) (31 August 2026) (Judgment)
Court
High Court
Case number
Constitutional Petition E017 of 2025
Judge
["RN Nyakundi"]
The High Court dismissed a constitutional petition seeking to stop investigation and prosecution over alleged forgery linked to an estate and land dispute.
The High Court declined leave for judicial review after finding the application duplicated a pending Sports Disputes Tribunal matter on the same nominations.
Sub judice
Abuse of process
Parallel proceedings
Leave to commence judicial review
Caf-afcon 2027 local organising committee nominations
Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E014 of 2026
Judge
["GMA Ongondo"]
The court upheld a preliminary objection and struck out an eviction application, holding that pending succession proceedings over the same estate property made the matter sub judice.
Ngozi v Al-Ghaarify (Formerly Known as Khamis Khalef Ahmed) & another (Civil Case E091 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 819 (KLR) (27 August 2026) (Ruling)
Court
Magistrate's Court
Case number
Civil Case E091 of 2025
Judge
["EM Mwamuye"]
The Preliminary Objection succeeded only partly. The Court held that the Plaintiff is bound by the Consent Arbitral Award of 19th November 2024 and by the Environment and Land Court rulings of 4th July 2025 and 23rd April 2026, so any claim seeking to reopen, contradict or circumvent those determinations is barred by res judicata and finality. However, the 1st Defendant did not show that every issue in the entire suit, especially claims involving Kenya Commercial Bank PLC and distinct motor vehicle-related obligations, was previously heard and finally decided between the same parties or privi…
Moyale Mall Limited & 2 others v Ali & 18 others (Environment and Land Appeal E012 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 5336 (KLR) (21 August 2026) (Ruling)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Case number
Environment and Land Appeal E012 of 2026
Judge
["EK Wabwoto"]
The court held it was functus officio as to merits but retained limited power to correct the record and make orders necessary to give practical effect to the judgment. It allowed correction of the cause title and lease count under section 99, clarified the scope of the remittal, declined to adjudicate the separate Tribunal ruling of 10 June 2026, declined to pronounce on the Tribunal’s competence in that separate matter, and granted limited consequential relief restoring positions after the impugned interim orders were set aside. It also ordered the remitted references to be heard by a differ…
Nasiuma v Mumelo (Commercial Case E030 of 2026) [2026] SCC 213 (KLR) (19 August 2026) (Ruling)
Court
Small Claims Court
Case number
Commercial Case E030 of 2026
Judge
["AZ Ogange"]
The Applicant failed to establish any new, legally cognisable basis to set aside or reopen the judgment, and the motion was a repetitive attempt to re-litigate matters already determined or that ought to have been raised earlier; it therefore amounted to an abuse of the process of the Court and had to be dismissed.
Republic v Prahudas & another (Criminal Revision E117 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 13017 (KLR) (18 August 2026) (Ruling)
Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Revision E117 of 2025
Judge
["AM Muteti"]
The High Court held that the trial magistrate did not commit a reviewable illegality or impropriety in refusing withdrawal because section 87(a) CPC gives the court a real supervisory role, not a mechanical one, and the reasons advanced by the DPP were insufficient. The court found that the existence of insolvency petitions did not justify halting a prosecution whose foundation was the alleged criminal conduct involving a company under administration, that victim consultation mattered, and that the prosecution was in the public interest to deter misuse of company assets. The revision therefor…