[2025] KEHC 4279 (KLR)
The court found that the 1st respondent possessed two authentic certificates of costs, entitling him to recover the total amounts stated therein through a single execution process. The appellant failed to demonstrate that the amounts had been settled or that there was any fraud or impropriety in the execution. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 4279 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Ibrahim Aruna Aramadhani; Respondent: Evans Bwire Barasa; Respondent: Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Busia
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Election Petition Appeal 2 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Election Petition Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution of Costs
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- WM Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Taxation of Costs, Abuse of Process
- 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
Ibrahim Aruna Aramadhani
Appellant
Evans Bwire Barasa
Respondent
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Election Petition Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution of Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to a stay of execution of the taxed costs pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the 1st respondent is entitled to recover amounts in both certificates of costs in a single execution process.
- 3 Whether the application amounts to an abuse of court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the 1st respondent possessed two authentic certificates of costs, entitling him to recover the total amounts stated therein through a single execution process. The appellant failed to demonstrate that the amounts had been settled or that there was any fraud or impropriety in the execution. The court held that the application for stay of execution lacked merit and constituted an abuse of process, as it was not supported by evidence or substantive legal grounds. Consequently, the application was dismissed and the interim stay orders previously granted were discharged.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 26th November 2024 is dismissed.
- The temporary orders granted on 2nd December 2024 are discharged.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Aramadhani v Barasa & another (Election Petition Appeal 2 of 2018) [2025] KEHC 4279 (KLR) (4 April 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 4279 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Busia
Election Petition Appeal 2 of 2018
WM Musyoka, J
April 4, 2025
Between
Ibrahim Aruna Aramadhani
Appellant
and
Evans Bwire Barasa
1st Respondent
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. The Motion, dated 26th November 2024, is by the appellant. He would like to obtain orders to stay execution for costs awarded to the respondents, in a certificate of costs dated 17th June 2020. His case is that costs were taxed at Kshs. 36,910. 00, but the 1st respondent was seeking to recover Kshs. 419,405. 00 from him. He argues that there is fraud and lack of justification.
2. The 1st respondent has reacted to the Motion. His affidavit was sworn on 8th January 2025. He avers that he holds 2 certificates of costs, one of Kshs. 283,295. 00, dated 17th October 2018 and the other of Kshs. 36,910. 00, dated 17th June 2020. he is seeking to recover the amounts in both, in one execution process, hence the figure in the warrant of arrest. He has attached copies of the 2 certificates of costs.
3. The appellant has not reacted to that explanation by the 1st respondent.
4. Directions were given on 10th February 2025, for canvassing of that application by written submissions. I have seen submissions by the 1st respondent, which I have read and noted the arguments advanced. I have not seen any by the appellant.
5. I have perused the court file herein, and I have come across the 2 certificates of costs, whose copies are annexed to the affidavit of the 1st respondent. The 2 certificates are authentic. The 1st respondent is entitled to recover the amounts in both certificates. I note that the appellant does not say that the amounts due have been settled.
6. The application, dated 26th November 2024, has no merit, in the circumstances. It was filed in abuse of process, and I hereby dismiss the same. The temporary orders, granted on 2nd December 2024, are hereby discharged. Orders accordingly.
DELIVERED BY EMAIL, DATED AND SIGNED IN CHAMBERS, AT BUSIA, THIS 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2025. W MUSYOKAJUDGEMr. Arthur Etyang, Court Assistant.AdvocatesMr. Wycliffe Okutta, instructed by Ouma-Okutta & Associates, Advocates for the appellant.Mr. Newtone Shihemi, instructed by Maloba & Company, Advocates for the 1st respondent.