Onduru v Alela (Environment and Land Appeal E020 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 7722 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court dismissed a landowner's appeal, ruling that temporary court orders can only be challenged if they contain an obvious error, not simply because the parties disagree.
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 appeal is merited
- 2.Who should bear the cost of the appeal
Key legal issues
#Whether there was an error apparent on the face of the record warranting review of the conservatory orders of 16th April 2024
There was no error apparent; the trial court's order was interlocutory and did not determine whether the dispute was one of lease or trespass
The trial court had issued conservatory orders at an interlocutory stage pending the hearing of the main suit. Since the suit had not been heard and determined on merit, the ruling could not be said to have erroneously decided the dispute as one of lease rather than trespass. Grounds on jurisdiction and the Rent Tribunal were therefore premature and the appeal failed.
Whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction over rent matters
The court found no basis to disturb the interlocutory order on jurisdictional grounds
The Appellant argued rent matters belong to the Business Rent Tribunal, but the Respondent showed the lease concerned agricultural land rather than commercial premises, and the conservatory orders were interlocutory in aid of a trespass claim. The court did not determine jurisdiction finally, deferring all issues to the full hearing of the suit.
Legal principles established
#- On a first appeal the court must reconsider and evaluate the evidence and draw its own conclusions, while making due allowance for not having seen or heard the witnesses
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs
- 2.Lower court matter to be speeded up and file presented to the trial court
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Principal Magistrate's Court, Rongo
- Rongo ELC No. E012 of 2021
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal under the Environment and Land Court Act (Section 13(2)(a) and Section 23 cited in submissions)
Relief refused
#Allowing the appeal and setting aside the trial court's ruling dated 23rd September 2024; dismissal of the Respondent's suit for want of jurisdiction
The order appealed from was interlocutory and did not determine the suit on merit; there was no error apparent on the face of the record
Costs
No order as to costs - appeal dismissed with no order as to costs
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.
In the conclusion, the appeal lacks merit and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
It is this court’s view that the trial court only issued conservatory orders at an interlocutory stage as the suit was yet to be heard and determined on merit.
It is this court’s view that there was no error apparent on the record since it is a fact that the trial court’s ruling was yet to determine the matter on merit
This court directs that lower court matter be speeded up upon this Judgment and file being presented to the trial court.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Onduru v Alela (Environment and Land Appeal E020 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 7722 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Rongo ELC Appeal E012 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7722/eng@2025-11-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.