[2017] KEHC 9910 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 9910 (KLR)

The court found that the Notice of Motion dated 8th February 2016 was premature because the decision on whether to set aside the consent order of 17th April 2012 (adopted by the court on 18th June 2012) had not yet been made. The stay of execution relating to the mortgaged property, as ordered by Judge Gikonyo on...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEHC 9910 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Pastor Anthony Makena Chege; Defendant: Nancy Wamaitha Magak; Defendant: Tumaini Letu Agencies Ltd; Respondent: Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 213 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Notice of Motion and Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Notice of Motion dated 8th February 2016 struck out as premature with costs to the Interested Party.
Judges
F Tuiyott
Legal Topics
Consent Orders, Mortgage Disputes, Preliminary Objection, Stay of Execution
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Consent Orders Mortgage Disputes Preliminary Objection Stay of Execution

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pastor Anthony Makena Chege

Plaintiff

Nancy Wamaitha Magak

Defendant

Tumaini Letu Agencies Ltd

Defendant

Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Notice of Motion and Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the Notice of Motion dated 8th February 2016 is premature in light of the pending decision on setting aside the consent order.
  2. 2 Whether the stay of execution order relating to the mortgaged property should be lifted before the consent order is set aside or varied.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Notice of Motion dated 8th February 2016 was premature because the decision on whether to set aside the consent order of 17th April 2012 (adopted by the court on 18th June 2012) had not yet been made. The stay of execution relating to the mortgaged property, as ordered by Judge Gikonyo on 16th February 2015, remained in force, and the negotiations contemplated by the court had not yielded a settlement. Granting the orders sought in the motion would reactivate the consent order and potentially result in conflicting or absurd outcomes, as some prayers would be settled by the consent while others would vary its terms. The court held that until the consent order is...

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dated 8th February 2016 struck out as premature with costs to the Interested Party.

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 8th February 2016 is struck out as premature.
  • Costs awarded to the Interested Party.