[2015] KECA 248 (KLR)

[2015] KECA 248 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that the intended appeal was against a negative order, specifically an order refusing to grant a stay of proceedings, which is not capable of execution except as to costs. The court reaffirmed that no appeal lies against such negative orders, and that it lacks jurisdiction to grant a stay...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KECA 248 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Banking Insurance and Finance Union (K); Respondent: Hon. Justus Aloo Ogeka; Respondent: Ouma Juma; Respondent: Sebastian Ngor; Respondent: Richard Ongo; Respondent: Mark Amimo; Respondent: Monica Kend; Respondent: Nancy Jeruto (As interim officials of Kenya National Union of Cooperatives Staff); Respondent: The Registrar of Trade Unions; Respondent: Kenya Union of Commercial Finance Union (K)
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 20 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
AM Githinji, PM Mwilu
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Negative Orders, Trade Union Registration, Exercise of Discretion
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Employment and Labour Stay of Proceedings Negative Orders Trade Union Registration Exercise of Discretion

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Banking Insurance and Finance Union (K)

Applicant

Hon. Justus Aloo Ogeka

Respondent

Ouma Juma

Respondent

Sebastian Ngor

Respondent

Richard Ongo

Respondent

Mark Amimo

Respondent

Monica Kend

Respondent

Nancy Jeruto (As interim officials of Kenya National Union of Cooperatives Staff)

Respondent

The Registrar of Trade Unions

Respondent

Kenya Union of Commercial Finance Union (K)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal can grant a stay of proceedings pending appeal where the intended appeal is against a negative order refusing stay by the lower court.
  2. 2 Whether an appeal lies against a negative order that does not require any party to do or refrain from doing anything, except as to costs.
  3. 3 Whether the intended appeal is arguable and satisfies the requirements for stay under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the intended appeal was against a negative order, specifically an order refusing to grant a stay of proceedings, which is not capable of execution except as to costs. The court reaffirmed that no appeal lies against such negative orders, and that it lacks jurisdiction to grant a stay where the lower court's order does not require any party to do or refrain from doing anything. Furthermore, the court found that the intended appeal did not meet the threshold of being arguable under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, as it was merely a challenge to the exercise of discretion by the trial court. Consequently, the application for stay of proceedings was...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 28th January 2015 is dismissed with costs.