Lelei & 2 others v Tanui & 2 others (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E019 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 4973 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land court confirmed that a freely signed settlement agreement between parties is binding and becomes the court's final judgment.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.The parties' ownership rights and interests over the suit property Nandi/Songoliet/12
- 2.Whether the partial settlement agreement as read with the consent have disposed of this suit
Key legal issues
#Whether a partial mediation agreement read with a consent can dispose of a limitation-of-actions originating summons
Yes; the validly entered consent and partial settlement agreement are binding and were adopted as the judgment of the court, disposing of the claims of the settling parties.
The court applied the settled law that consent agreements are binding contracts founded on the parties' free mutual agreement, citing Supreme Court and Court of Appeal authority. Since the first and second plaintiffs had settled with the defendant through the mediation agreement, formalised in a consent by counsel, the court adopted the consent as judgment. The claim by Robert Kiptoo Sumet, which did not settle, was addressed through the monetary compensation term in the consent.
Costs where a suit is compromised by consent
Each party to bear their own costs, invoking the proviso to section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.
The court departed from the general rule that costs follow the event by expressly invoking the proviso to section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and the decision in Rai & 3 others vs Rai & 4 others, ordering parties to bear their own costs given the consensual disposal of the suit.
Legal principles established
#- Validly entered consent agreements are binding contracts drawing authority from the mutual agreement of the parties, which the court must adopt and give effect to.
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered in terms of the consent dated 30th July 2026 as read with the partial mediation agreement dated 7th July 2025
- 2.Partial mediation agreement dated 7th July 2025 adopted as an order of the Court
- 3.2nd Defendant to compensate the 2nd Plaintiff in the sum of Ksh. 1,800,000/= for the claim of 1.8 acres out of parcel Nandi/Songoliet/654, payable to the 2nd Plaintiff's Equity Bank Account Number 0550191841379, Westlands Branch, in the names of Robert Kiptoo Sumey
- 4.Upon payment of the sum in full, the 2nd Plaintiff shall vacate the parcel
- 5.Mention date to be issued to confirm compliance
- 6.Each party to bear their own costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 17, 30 & 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act, cap 22 Laws of Kenya (amended originating summons); compromise by consent under the Civil Procedure Act
Relief refused
#Prayer for extinguishment of the registered proprietor's interest and vesting of 3.10, 1.80 and 2.20 acres on the plaintiffs as prayed in the amended originating summons
The suit was compromised by the partial mediation agreement and consent in respect of the first and second plaintiffs; only Robert Kiptoo Sumet's claim had not settled, and judgment was entered in terms of the consent rather than the originating summons.
Costs
By dint of the proviso to section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and Rai & 3 others vs Rai & 4 others {2014} KESC 31 (KLR), parties to bear their own 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.
A fortiori, judgment be and is hereby entered in terms of the consent as read with the partial settlement agreement as set out in paragraphs 3 and 4 hereinabove accordingly.
validly entered consent agreements are binding contracts that draw their authority from the mutual agreement of the parties who freely reached the settlement or consent
That, the partial mediation agreement dated 7 th July 2025 be adopted as an order of this Honourable Court.
That, the 2nd Defendant shall compensate the 2nd Plaintiff in the sum of Ksh. One Million Eight Hundred Shillings Only (1,800,000/=) for the claim of 1.8 acres Nandi/Songoliet/654,
parties to bear their own costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The consent is dated 30th July 2026, the same date the judgment was delivered, while the judgment text refers to the mediation agreement of 7th July 2025; the dating sequence is internally unusual.
The consent letter contains duplicated and misnumbered sub-paragraphs, with two paragraphs marked '(c)'.
The compensation figure is written as 'Ksh. One Million Eight Hundred Shillings Only (1,800,000/=)', which is internally inconsistent wording (shillings vs one million eight hundred thousand).
The suit property in the prayers is Nandi/Songoliet/12, but the consent compensation clause references parcel Nandi/Songoliet/654; the judgment does not reconcile this discrepancy.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Lelei & 2 others v Tanui & 2 others (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E019 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 4973 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELCC E019 OF 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4973/eng@2026-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.