Fave Gas Oil K Ltd v Meru County & Investment Development Corporation & another (Environment and Land Case E007 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 2887 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land court allowed a plaintiff to withdraw their case but left the question of who pays legal costs for another day.
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- 1.Whether the plaintiff's suit, on oral application, should be marked withdrawn with no order as to costs
- 2.Whether the defendants are entitled to the costs of the suit notwithstanding that no court document was served on the plaintiff
Key legal issues
#Whether the plaintiff could withdraw the suit and obtain an order of no costs
The suit was marked withdrawn on the plaintiff's oral application, unopposed as to withdrawal itself, but the costs consequence was not resolved at that stage
The defendants did not oppose the withdrawal but sought costs of the suit. The plaintiff opposed costs, arguing that the defendants never served any court document and were deemed not to have filed a response. The court granted the withdrawal but reserved costs for determination on affidavit evidence and brief oral submissions, setting a timetable for filing and a hearing date.
Legal principles established
#- Where a suit is withdrawn but costs are contested, the question of costs may be canvassed through affidavit evidence and oral submissions rather than decided summarily on the withdrawal application
Court orders
#- 1.The plaintiff's substantive claim is marked 'withdrawn'
- 2.The issue of costs shall be canvassed through affidavit evidence to be tendered and exchanged within 20 days
- 3.The plaintiff shall file and serve their affidavit within 10 days
- 4.The defendants shall file and serve their affidavit within 10 days of service
- 5.Parties will tender brief oral submissions on the issue of costs on 3/6/2026
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Not stated in the judgment extract
Relief refused
#The plaintiff's request that the suit be withdrawn with no order as to costs
Costs were not determined forthwith; the court deferred the costs question to affidavit evidence and submissions
Costs
No final costs order made; the issue of costs was deferred for canvassing by affidavit evidence and brief oral submissions on 3/6/2026
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.
The plaintifi has made an oral application seeking to have this suit marked “ Withdrawn with no order as to costs.”
In the above circumstances, the plaintifi’s substantive claim is marked “withdrawn”.
The issue of costs shall be canvassed through afidavit evidence to be tendered and exchanged within 20 days.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment extract does not state the name of the case, case number, or the court; the court and judge are identifiable only from the coram and delivery details
The costs question is expressly left undecided, so the judgment contains no final costs order despite recording competing positions on costs
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Fave Gas Oil K Ltd v Meru County & Investment Development Corporation & another (Environment and Land Case E007 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 2887 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment extract. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2887/eng@2026-05-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.