Samuel Karithii Rugiri T/A Quick Line Auctioneers v Timothy Muriungi & Oil Com [K] Limited
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court confirmed that a statutory eviction notice alone is not enough — landlords must obtain a formal court eviction order before removing anyone.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether an error or mistake apparent on the face of the record was established to warrant review
No; the applicant's grievance concerned a supposed misconstruction of Sections 152E and 152F of the Land Act, which is an erroneous exposition of the law, not an apparent error reviewable under Order 45.
The court restated the principles that an apparent error must be self-evident and require no elaborate argument, relying on the National Bank of Kenya v Ndungu Njau and NSSF v Kenya Tea Growers' Association authorities. The applicant's complaint that the court misconstrued Section 152E and 152F is precisely the kind of erroneous legal conclusion that cannot ground review.
Whether an unchallenged Section 152E eviction notice suffices without a formal eviction order
No; an eviction notice is akin to a demand notice and cannot be equated to an eviction order enforceable with police assistance.
The court held that an eviction notice equates to a demand notice; non-compliance does not constitute a judgment for execution. The issuing party must obtain a formal eviction order from a competent court before eviction can be undertaken, consistent with Gusii Mwalimu Investment v Mwalimu Hotel Kisii.
The character of the application
The application was a disguised appeal intended to have the judge sit on appeal on his own ruling, and constituted an abuse of the court's process.
The court found that the applicant was inviting the court to set aside its well-reasoned ruling on the basis that other views were possible, which is impermissible in review. Such a subtle invitation reverts to the same judge to perform an appellate function, defeating the cause of justice.
Legal principles established
#- An error or mistake apparent on the face of the record must be self-evident, discernible at a glance, and not a matter admitting of two opinions; an erroneous exposition of the law or misconception of a statute is not a ground for review.
- An eviction notice under Section 152E of the Land Act is a demand notice; when not complied with, a formal order of eviction from a competent court is required before eviction.
- The existence of two schools of thought among judges of the Environment and Land Court is not a basis for review; review cannot be used to invite a court to sit on appeal on its own decision.
Court orders
#- 1.The Application dated 11.07.2026 be and is hereby Dismissed.
- 2.No orders as to costs.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 13 and 19 of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2011; Order 45 Rules 1, 2 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Samuel Karithii Rugiri T/A Quick Line Auctioneers v Timothy Muriungi & Oil Com [K] Limited", Case Analysis (2026). Misc. Application No. E019 of 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5980/eng@2026-09-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.