Kapkomoi v Korir (Environment and Land Case E029 of 2022) [2026] KEELC 3231 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land court froze all dealings with parcel Nandi/Ndalat Settlement/908—no sale, transfer, or subdivision—until the dispute is fully heard.
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 prayer for a status quo order alongside the proposed manner of hearing of the application by written submissions was meritorious
Key legal issues
#Whether a status quo order should issue over the suit land pending inter partes hearing of the application
Yes - the court issued a status quo order preserving the register of the suit land, finding the application partially merited and relying on its power under section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act and Practice Direction Number 32 of 2014.
The court noted the application was served but unanswered; the respondents' counsel however sought seven days to respond. Invoking section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act and Practice Direction Number 32 concerning status quo orders on inter-partes hearings, the court balanced the character of the application, the circumstances and the ends of justice, issuing a status quo order preserving the register while directing a written-submissions timetable.
Whether the application should be heard by way of written submissions
Yes - the court directed that the application be heard by written submissions under Order 51 Rule 16 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010, with a seven-day filing timetable.
The respondents' counsel, while confirming service, sought seven days to file a response and proposed that the application be heard by way of written submissions. The court accepted this, allowing the response, any rejoinder, and submissions from both sides to be filed within seven-day windows before the hearing of the application.
Legal principles established
#- A party served with an application who opts not to respond cannot prevent the court from acting on the application, but the court may still accommodate a party ready to respond (following Festus Ogada v Hans Mollin)
- Section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act empowers the court to grant interim preservation orders, including status quo orders, over the subject matter
Court orders
#- 1.Respondents to file and serve a response to the application within seven days from the date of the ruling
- 2.Applicant to file and serve any rejoinder together with submissions within seven days upon service of the response
- 3.Application to be heard by way of written submissions under Order 51 Rule 16 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010
- 4.Respondents' counsel to file and serve submissions within seven days upon service of the applicant's submissions
- 5.Status quo order over the suit land: the register relating to Nandi/Ndalat Settlement/908 shall not be altered - no sale, charge, sub-division, transfer or disposal pending hearing and determination of the application
- 6.Application fixed for 17th June 2026 to confirm compliance including submissions and for further directions
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 13(7) of the Environment and Land Court Act, and Practice Direction Number 32 of the Court's Directions, 2014
Relief refused
#Injunctive order (interlocutory injunction)
The court allowed only prayer 4 for status quo, finding the application partially merited; the injunction was not granted at this stage
Costs
No costs order made in the judgment
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 result, the application is partially allowed in terms of prayer 4 for status quo over the suit land.
In particular, the register relating to the suit land shall not be altered hence, no sale, charge, sub division, transfer or in any manner dispose of the suit land pending the hearing and determination of the application.
It is so ordered.
section 13 (7) of the Environment and Land Court 2015 (2011) empowers this court to grant interim preservation order in respect of a subject matter. Indeed, status quo is one of such orders.
Issues in the judgment
#Statutory citation garbled in judgment: 'Environment and Land Court 2015 (2011)'
The judgment does not name the defendants/respondents or give the case number of the suit
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kapkomoi v Korir (Environment and Land Case E029 of 2022) [2026] KEELC 3231 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3231/eng@2026-05-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.