[2020] KEELC 3637 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant failed to file written submissions as directed, thereby neglecting the duty to prosecute the application. In the absence of submissions from the applicant, the court was left only with the respondent's submissions to consider. The court held that a case belongs to the litigants,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 3637 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Andriano M’Kirichia; Respondent: Silas Ringine Imanene
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 63 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs to the respondent
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Appeals From Subordinate Courts
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Andriano M’Kirichia
Appellant
Silas Ringine Imanene
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a stay of execution of the judgment delivered by the lower court pending appeal.
- 2 Whether failure to file written submissions affects the determination of the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant failed to file written submissions as directed, thereby neglecting the duty to prosecute the application. In the absence of submissions from the applicant, the court was left only with the respondent's submissions to consider. The court held that a case belongs to the litigants, who must persuade the court to rule in their favour. The failure by the applicant to argue the application through submissions was fatal to the application. Consequently, the application for stay of execution was dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Orders
- The application dated 14.5.2019 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU
ELC APPEAL NO. 63OF 2019
ANDRIANO M’KIRICHIA …………………………………… APPELLANT
VERSUS
SILAS RINGINE IMANENE ………..……………………. RESPONDENT
RULING
1. Vide a Notice of Motion filed in court on 14/5/2019, the Applicant who was the defendant in Maua case No. CMCC 239 of 2014, is seeking a stay of the Judgment of the lower court which was delivered on 1/4/2019. The application is supported by the grounds in support of the application and in the affidavit of the applcaint.
2. The application was opposed via the replying affidavit of the respondent filed in court on 25/6/2019.
3. On 9/7/2019 the court gave directions for the application to be argued by way of written submissions. I have not seen any submissions by the Applicant. Only the Respondent has filed submissions.
4. A case belongs to litigants who are duty bound to persuade the court to deliver a decision in their favour. In the instant case, the applicant was required to argue his application through submissions of which he failed to do so.
5. In the circumstances, I only have the submissions of the Respondent to consider.
6. In the circumstances the application dated 14. 5.2019 is found to have no merits, the same is dismissed with costs to the Respondent.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 12TH FEBRUARY, 2020
IN THE PRESENCE OF:
C.A Kananu
Kiogora holding brief for Gikunda for appellant – present
Materi for Respondent – present
Parties absent
HON. LUCY. N. MBUGUA
ELC JUDGE