Ahmed v Tanui
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court struck out a landowner's contempt and enforcement application because her case was already on appeal before the Court of Appeal.
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 application is properly before this court
- 2.Whether the Respondent should be restrained from dealing or disposing of land parcel number Nandi Kamobo/6695 and/or Nandi/Kamobo/6696
- 3.Whether the Respondent should be cited for contempt of court and orders issued as prayed in the application
Key legal issues
#Whether the ELC retains jurisdiction over a contempt and enforcement application while an appeal from the same case is pending before the Court of Appeal
The court held it lacked jurisdiction; jurisdiction had shifted upward to the Court of Appeal and the court was functus officio over the application
Relying on John Mutua Ngunjiri v Silas Richard Mukolwe, the court held that where a substantive appeal is fully active before a senior appellate court, duplicate motions in lower or parallel benches are devoid of jurisdiction. The pending Court of Appeal Civil Application No. E041 of 2025 therefore ousted the ELC's jurisdiction over the contempt and enforcement application.
Whether the Respondent should be cited for contempt and sanctioned, and whether an injunction and police security orders should issue
Not determined on the merits; the court declined to take any further step once it found the application was devoid of jurisdiction
The court noted the quasi-criminal nature of contempt and the applicable standard of proof (Sum v Koech) and the Giella v Cassman Brown injunction test, but held that having found the application devoid of jurisdiction, there was no need to make one more step. The application was struck out.
Legal principles established
#- When a substantive appeal arising from a matter is fully active before a senior appellate court, lower or parallel courts are devoid of jurisdiction over the matter
- Lack of jurisdiction renders a court's decision void, not merely voidable; a void act is a nullity ab initio
- A court's jurisdiction flows from the Constitution or legislation or both, and a court can only exercise jurisdiction as conferred by the Constitution or other written law
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 3rd March 2026 is struck out 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 jurisdiction; court declined to exercise it on account of a pending appeal (Court of Appeal Civil Application No. E041 of 2025)
Relief refused
#Citation of the Defendant/Respondent for contempt of the orders of 14th February 2024 and decree of 22nd February 2024, and committal to civil jail or sequestration of property
The court found it lacked jurisdiction because a substantive appeal arising from the case is pending before the Court of Appeal at Eldoret
Orders directing the OCS/OCPD Kapsabet to give security to the Applicant, Land Surveyor and Registrar to survey and delineate Nandi/Kamobo/6696 and Nandi/Kamobo/6695
Same lack of jurisdiction; the court declined to take any further step after finding the application was devoid of jurisdiction
Injunction restraining the Respondent from dealing with or disposing of Nandi/Kamobo/6695 and Nandi/Kamobo/6696
Not reached on the merits; the court only noted the Giella v Cassman Brown test before declining jurisdiction
Costs
No orders as to costs - the application was struck out with 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.
when a substantive appeal arising from the matter in dispute is fully active before a senior appellate court; duplicate motions in lower or parallel benches are completely devoid of jurisdiction over the matter
It is crystal clear that, jurisdiction has shifted upward to the Court of Appeal hence, this court is functus officio over the present matter and can no longer attend to this parallel inept application.
Wherefore, the application dated 3rd March 2026 must fail. The same is hereby struck out with no orders as to costs.
Issues in the judgment
#First prayer in the notice of motion is recorded only as 'Moot', with no text
Court cites injunction and contempt authorities after already holding it lacks jurisdiction, muddling the analysis
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ahmed v Tanui", Case Analysis (2026). Environment and Land Case 97 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5900/eng@2026-09-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.