[2023] KEHC 22989 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 22989 (KLR)

The court found that the judgment of the trial court had already been executed before it was set aside by the ruling under appeal. As a result, there were no further proceedings pending or ongoing in the trial court that could be stayed. The application for stay of further proceedings was therefore without basis, as...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 22989 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Catherine Akinyi; Respondent: Maurice Odhiambo Ojing; Respondent: Malv Investment; Respondent: Al Alyaan Motors Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal E604 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
JN Mulwa
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Execution of Judgment, Appeals Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Stay of Proceedings Execution of Judgment Appeals Process

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Catherine Akinyi

Appellant

Maurice Odhiambo Ojing

Respondent

Malv Investment

Respondent

Al Alyaan Motors Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether a stay of further proceedings should be granted pending determination of the appeal.
  2. 2 Whether there are any further proceedings to be stayed given the execution of the decree.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the judgment of the trial court had already been executed before it was set aside by the ruling under appeal. As a result, there were no further proceedings pending or ongoing in the trial court that could be stayed. The application for stay of further proceedings was therefore without basis, as there was nothing left for hearing or determination in the lower court. The absence of any response from the respondents did not alter this conclusion, as the facts were undisputed and the relief sought was not available in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application dated July 1, 2023 is dismissed with costs.