Adera v Okode (Environment and Land Case 296 of 2017) [2025] KEELC 6467 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Migori court jailed a man for ignoring an eviction order, ruling that filing an appeal does not excuse obeying court orders.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the defendant/respondent should be held in contempt of the court
- 2.Who should bear the costs of this application
Key legal issues
#Whether the defendant/respondent was in contempt of the decree of 29th July 2022 and the order of 13th July 2023
The applicant proved the elements of civil contempt: the orders were clear, unambiguous and binding; the respondent had knowledge and notice; he breached them by remaining in occupation and violently resisting ploughing; and his disobedience was deliberate
The decree permanently injuncted the respondent from occupying LR Kamangambo/Kanyimach/787 and a 90-day stay lapsed without compliance. The respondent admitted the orders, never raised ambiguity, and offered no justification. He did not deny the 10th November 2024 attack on the plaintiff's driver. His pendency of a reference at the Court of Appeal did not excuse him, as no stay of execution existed.
Whether filing a reference at the Court of Appeal absolves the respondent from obeying the orders
No. A reference is not an appeal, and even an appeal without a stay does not suspend compliance
The court relied on Habo Agencies Limited v Wilfred Odhiambo Musigo and Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, holding that no appeal operates as a stay of execution unless the court so orders, and that the court's orders remained binding notwithstanding the reference
The appropriate sentence for contempt
A deterrent sentence was warranted given the violence, lack of remorse and rampant disobedience of court orders; a fine of KShs 1,000,000/= with default imprisonment of one year, remand in custody, and vacation of the land within one week
The court considered the respondent's mitigation but found him defiant and not remorseful. It noted that the applicant and his driver were endangered when attempting to effect the decree, requiring a firm and decisive deterrent sentence under Section 29 of the Environment and Land Court Act
Legal principles established
#- To succeed in civil contempt, the applicant must prove the terms of the order, the respondent's knowledge of those terms, and the respondent's failure to comply; wilfulness and bad faith are then inferred unless rebutted
- Civil contempt must be proved to a standard higher than balance of probabilities but below beyond reasonable doubt
- Filing an appeal or reference does not operate as a stay of execution; absent a stay, the party is bound to obey the decree
- A person against whom an order is made is bound to obey it unless and until it is discharged, even if he believes it irregular or void
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 11th November 2024 is allowed with costs to the applicant
- 2.The Respondent, Paul Odera Okode, is found guilty of contempt of the court's orders/decree and convicted accordingly
- 3.Under Section 29 of the Environment and Land Court Act, the Respondent is sentenced to pay a fine of Kenya Shillings One Million (KShs 1,000,000/=), in default he serves one year imprisonment
- 4.The Respondent shall forthwith be remanded in G.K. Prison, Migori
- 5.After complying with or serving the sentence, the Respondent shall vacate the suit land within one week, in default the applicant to move the Court once again
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 29 of the Environment and Land Court Act; Section 38 of the Civil Procedure Act
Relief refused
#Imprisonment for thirty (30) days as sought
The court opted for a deterrent fine under Section 29 of the Environment and Land Court Act instead, with remand until payment
Fine of Kshs 2,000,000/= as sought
The court sentenced the respondent to a fine of KShs 1,000,000/= rather than the Kshs 2,000,000/= sought
Costs
Application allowed with costs to the applicant
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Given the foregoing, I find that the application is merited and is allowed with costs to the applicant. The Respondent, Paul Odera Okode is guilty of contempt of this court's orders/ decree as prayed in the application. I convict him accordingly and now call on him to mitigate, which he does orally.
Thus, under Section 29 of the Environment and Land Act I sentence him to pay a fine of Kenya Shillings One Million (KShs 1,000,000/=) only in default, he serves year imprisonment. He shall forthwith be remanded in G.K. Prison, Migori.
Obedience of Court orders is not optional, rather, it is mandatory and a person does not choose whether to obey a court order or not
A court without contempt power is not a court.
It is important to note that a reference is not an appeal and the fact of filing one at the Court of Appeal does not in any way guarantee that it will succeed.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment inconsistently dates the order requiring eviction, referring at various points to 13th July 2023, 6th October 2023 and 13th June 2023
The default term of imprisonment is recorded as 'year' without specifying 'one year'
Paragraph 34 appears incomplete, ending mid-sentence
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Adera v Okode (Environment and Land Case 296 of 2017) [2025] KEELC 6467 (KLR)[2025] KEELC 6467 (KLR)18 Sept 2025applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Adera v Okode (Environment and Land Case 296 of 2017) [2025] KEELC 6467 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Environment & Land Case 296 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6467/eng@2025-09-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.