Barno & 2 others v DCI Nandi South (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E011 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5311 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land court dismissed an application to transfer a case because the applicants repeatedly failed to show up and prosecute it.
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 applicants' Notice of Motion dated 24th February 2025 seeking transfer of Eldoret case E&L 365 of 2019 to the Kapsabet Chief Magistrates Court should be allowed, given the applicants' failure to attend court to prosecute it
- 2.Whether the application should be dismissed under Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 for want of prosecution
Key legal issues
#Dismissal of an application for non-attendance by the applicants
The application was dismissed because the applicants, without any reason, failed to attend court to prosecute it, contrary to the constitutional injunction that justice shall not be delayed
The application had been pending since February 2025 with no explanation for the applicants' absence at the hearing. The court invoked Article 159(2)(b) of the Constitution that justice shall not be delayed, and Article 10 equitable principles that delay defeats equity and equity aids the vigilant. Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 provides for dismissal of such applications, and the court, balancing these provisions with sections 3 and 19 of the Environment and Land Court Act 2015, found dismissal appropriate, citing Njenga & another v Dean & 7 others on laxity.
Legal principles established
#- Justice shall not be delayed; a party who leaves an application pending without prosecuting it risks dismissal under Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010
- Delay defeats equity and equity aids the vigilant and not the indolent, a principle enshrined in Article 10 of the Constitution
Court orders
#- 1.The entire application dated 24th February 2025 was dismissed with no orders as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Environment and Land Court Act, 2015, sections 3 and 19; Article 159(2)(b) and Article 10 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010
Relief refused
#Prayer (c): transfer of Eldoret case E&L 365 of 2019 to Kapsabet Chief Magistrates Court
The applicants were absent without reason to prosecute the application and had demonstrated inexcusable laxity; delay defeats equity and equity aids the vigilant
Prayer (e): such other orders as the court deems fit in the interests of justice
The entire application was dismissed for want of prosecution
Costs
No orders 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.
the entire application dated 24th February 2025 be and is hereby dismissed with no orders as to costs.
Justice shall not be delayed
this court is bound by the principles of equity enshrined in Article 10 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 that delay defeats equity and equity aids the vigilant and not the indolent
Order 9 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 provides for dismissal of such an application or suit
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment is internally inconsistent on the year of the suit sought to be transferred: the prayers refer to 'ELDORET case E&L 365 of 2019' and the affidavit to 'Eldoret case E & L 365 of 2019', but paragraph 3 refers to 'Eldoret ELCC No. 365 of 2016'
The prayer for transfer is directed at a Chief Magistrates Court destination but the application also seeks allocation of the applicants' claim by government in 1998 and under adverse possession, none of which is resolved as the prayers (a) and (b) are marked moot
The delivery date is stated as 22nd July 2026, which post-dates the case number year 2025 by over a year; likely a typographical error
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Barno & 2 others v DCI Nandi South (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E011 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5311 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Kapsabet ELCLMISC No. E011 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5311/eng@2026-07-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.