Odando v Land Registrar, Nandi County & 4 others
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused temporary orders that would have effectively decided the whole land dispute, saying such relief needs exceptional circumstances.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether interim orders sought by the 2nd interested party (reopening of the access road and a surveyor's revisit of the ground) should be granted pending hearing and determination of the substantive motion
Key legal issues
#Whether interim orders mirroring the final prayers (Certiorari and Mandamus) could issue pending the substantive motion
The court declined to grant the interim orders, holding they would amount to granting the final orders sought and that no exceptional circumstances existed
The 2nd interested party sought interim reopening of the access road and a fresh survey. The court reasoned that these interim orders would have the effect of granting Certiorari and Mandamus, which are the final orders in the application. Citing the Mugenda case, it found no exceptional circumstances justified such interim relief and instead directed expedition of the substantive judgment.
Legal principles established
#- Interim orders that would effectively grant the final relief sought in a substantive motion will not issue absent exceptional circumstances
Court orders
#- 1.Interim orders sought at this stage of the application refused/cease for lack of exceptional circumstances
- 2.Court to expedite delivery of judgment to deal with the final prayers in the application
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 8 and 9 of the Law Reform Act, Cap 26; Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Articles 47 & 50 of the Constitution; Fair Administrative Action Act, 2015
Relief refused
#Interim reopening of the access road and a surveyor's revisit of the ground pending determination of the substantive motion
The interim orders sought would effectively grant the final orders of Certiorari and Mandamus, and there were no exceptional circumstances
Costs
No costs order made in the ruling
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.
Clearly, the interim orders sought by the 2nd interested party have the eect of granting Certiorari and Mandamus orders which are nal orders sought in the application.
Accordingly, the court would henceforth expedite delivery of judgment to deal with the nal prayers in the application.
It is so ordered.
Issues in the judgment
#Prayer refers to parcels Nandi/Kapsengere/481 and 1091 while the matter concerns Nandi/Kapseng'ere/486 and 1096
Application dated 3rd December 2025 but memorandum of appearance dated 3rd November 2025
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Odando v Land Registrar, Nandi County & 4 others", Case Analysis (2026). Environment and Land Case Judicial Review Application E004 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5883/eng@2026-09-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.