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 AppealPartially AllowedNotice of Motion dated 22nd January 2026 in the appeal by Hoking (Kenya) Real Estate Co. Limited· [2026] KECA 831 (KLR)

Hoking (Kenya) Real Estate Co Ltd v SG (Formerly SR) & another (Civil Appeal (Application) E650 of 2025) [2026] KECA 831 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
30 April 2026
2,664 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Court of Appeal allowed a company to join an appeal but refused it a stay and injunction because no valid notice of appeal had ever been filed.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi (Musinga, P, Lilan and Okello, JJA) on a notice of motion dated 22nd January 2026 by Denancy Investment Limited, the 1st defendant before the Environment and Land Court in Machakos ELC Case No. 86 of 2016. The trial court, in a judgment delivered on 7th May 2025, found that the 2007 and 2010 transactions over LR No 12xx5/5x5 and the grant and transfers over LR No 12xx5/6x2 were founded on forgery and fraud, declared SG the lawful owner of both parcels, nullified the impugned agreements and titles, and ordered eviction and a permanent injunction against Hoking and Denancy. Denancy sought joinder as 2nd respondent in Hoking's appeal, a stay of execution, injunctive relief, and that its draft notice of cross-appeal be deemed filed. The court held that jurisdiction under rule 5(2)(b) was never properly invoked because no valid notice of appeal was demonstrated, and that an unfiled draft cross-appeal cannot substitute for a duly lodged cross-appeal. It further held that an unjoined party lacks standing to obtain substantive relief under rule 5(2)(b). The prayer for joinder was nonetheless allowed because Denancy had a direct and proximate interest in the subject matter. The application was partially allowed: joinder granted, stay, injunction and deeming prayers declined, and each party ordered to bear its own costs. The decision binds subordinate courts and tribunals on the notice-of-appeal and joinder thresholds for rule 5(2)(b) applications.

Key legal issues

#
01

Invocation of jurisdiction under rule 5(2)(b)

Holding

Jurisdiction was not properly invoked because no valid notice of appeal was demonstrated.

Reasoning

Rule 77(1) requires a notice of appeal to be lodged within fourteen days of the decision appealed against, and this notice triggers the appellate process. Counsel for the applicant was unable, even when specifically asked by the court, to confirm the existence or date of any notice of appeal. Without such a notice there is no basis for the court to exercise its rule 5(2)(b) jurisdiction, following Safaricom v Ocean View and Equity Bank v West Link Mbo.

p. 4
02

Status of a draft notice of cross-appeal

Holding

A draft cross-appeal annexed to an affidavit cannot substitute for a duly lodged cross-appeal.

Reasoning

Rule 95(1) and (2) require a respondent who wishes to contend that the decision below should be varied or reversed to lodge a notice of cross-appeal within prescribed timelines. A cross-appeal is contingent upon and anchored on a properly instituted appeal and must itself be formally filed. An unfiled draft remains a mere intention and cannot cure the absence of a valid notice of appeal.

p. 4
03

Standing of an unjoined party to seek rule 5(2)(b) relief

Holding

Substantive relief under rule 5(2)(b) cannot be granted to a party who has not first been properly joined.

Reasoning

Applying Trusted Society of Human Rights Alliance v Mumo Matemu, only a party properly before the court can seek substantive relief. While joinder and substantive prayers may in appropriate circumstances be considered together, the applicant here combined joinder with stay and injunction prayers. Until joinder is effected, the applicant lacks standing to invoke the court's discretionary interim jurisdiction.

p. 5
04

Joinder of the applicant

Holding

Joinder was granted because the applicant was the 1st defendant at trial and the judgment made substantive orders against it.

Reasoning

The applicant filed a defence in the trial court and the impugned judgment made findings against it, including orders requiring it to vacate the suit property. It therefore has a direct and proximate interest in the subject matter. Applying Trusted Society, the applicant demonstrated a sufficient stake, and its presence is necessary for the complete and effectual determination of the issues.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • A notice of appeal is the jurisdictional foundation for any application under rule 5(2)(b); without a valid notice of appeal the Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to grant preservative orders.
  • A draft notice of cross-appeal annexed to an application cannot invoke the court's jurisdiction; only a duly lodged cross-appeal suffices.
  • A party must first be properly joined before it can seek substantive interim relief under rule 5(2)(b).
  • A person with a direct and proximate interest adversely affected by the judgment under appeal should be joined for the complete and effectual determination of the dispute.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Denancy Investment Limited joined as the 2nd respondent in the appeal instituted by Hoking
  2. 2.Prayers for stay of execution, injunction, and deeming the draft notice of cross-appeal as duly filed declined
  3. 3.Each party to bear its own costs of the application
On appeal from
Environment and Land Court
Machakos ELC Case No. 86 of 2016
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 3A and 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act; rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules; article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Hoking (Kenya) Real Estate Co Ltd v SG (Formerly SR) & another (Civil Appeal (Application) E650 of 2025) [2026] KECA 831 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Notice of Motion dated 22nd January 2026 in the appeal by Hoking (Kenya) Real Estate Co. Limited. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/831/eng@2026-04-30

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