Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealDismissedNot stated in the judgment· [2026] KECA 783 (KLR)

John Odero Okombo v Samson Ooko Ajwang

Court of Appeal of Kenya
24 April 2026
1,017 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 Court of Appeal refused to pause a land judgment, ruling the appeal had no merit and you cannot stay a negative court order.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicant, John Odero Okombo, moved the Court of Appeal at Kisumu by notice of motion seeking stay of execution of a consent judgment dated 13th July 2010 in Kisii Land Case No. 10 of 2008 consolidated with Land Case No. 100 of 2008, and of a ruling by GMA Ong'ondo, J delivered on 12th March 2024 in Homa Bay ELC No. E010 of 2023, pending an intended appeal. The respondent opposed through a notice of preliminary objection on res judicata and a replying affidavit. The court first traced the litigation history: in Kisii High Court Civil Case No. 100 of 2008, Makhandia, J declared the respondent's parent the lawful owner of LR No. Kanyamwa/Kochieng/Komungu/Kakaeta/169, ordered the applicant's eviction and permanently restrained him from re-entering; that decree was never appealed. The applicant's later originating summons in Homa Bay ELC No. E010 of 2023 seeking to set aside that decision was dismissed as res judicata when Ong'ondo, J upheld a preliminary objection, holding that litigation must come to an end. The Court of Appeal, though the application was framed under the Land Registration Act and Civil Procedure Act, treated it as invoking Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, requiring the twin tests of arguability and nugatory aspect per Stanley Kangethe Kinyanjui v. Tony Ketter. It held the intended appeal raises no arguable issues given the res judicata findings, and that the order sought to be stayed is a negative order incapable of being stayed; it accordingly did not consider the nugatory limb. The application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Arguability of the intended appeal

Holding

The intended appeal is not arguable because the dispute is res judicata, the suit property having been declared the respondent's by several decisions of courts of competent jurisdiction, including an unchallenged decree of the High Court.

Reasoning

The court traced the litigation history: the High Court (Makhandia, J) declared the respondent's parent lawful owner of the suit property, ordered eviction and a permanent injunction, and that decree was never appealed. The applicant's subsequent ELC suit to set aside that decision was dismissed as res judicata. Facing that settled position, the applicant could not demonstrate an arguable appeal under Rule 5(2)(b).

p. 3
02

Nugatory aspect

Holding

Having found the appeal not arguable, the court did not consider whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory.

Reasoning

The twin tests under Rule 5(2)(b) need not both be satisfied where the first fails; once the court found no arguable issues, it declined to examine the nugatory limb, noting it was unnecessary to reach the second question.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • An applicant under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules must establish the twin principles of arguability and the nugatory aspect.
  • A negative order is incapable of being stayed.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application for stay of execution is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondent
On appeal from
Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
ELC No. E010 of 2023 (OS)
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 17(1), 18(2) and 2 of the Land Registration Act 2012, Section 1B and 78 of the Civil Procedure Act, Order 42 Rule 6(1) and (2) of the Civil Procedure Rules; in substance Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "John Odero Okombo v Samson Ooko Ajwang", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/783/eng@2026-04-24

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