[2010] KECA 425 (KLR)

[2010] KECA 425 (KLR)

The Court found that the applicant had satisfied both limbs required for the grant of a stay under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. First, the applicant demonstrated that it had an arguable appeal, particularly regarding the legal and practical impossibility of reversing share entries and the potential...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] KECA 425 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: CFC Financial Services Limited; Respondent: Juja Road Fancy Store Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 328 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for stay of execution allowed in part; stay granted as per prayers 1 and 2; costs in the appeal.
Judges
JW Nyamu
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Appeals Process, Share Transactions, Capital Markets Regulation
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Stay of Execution Appeals Process Share Transactions Capital Markets Regulation

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CFC Financial Services Limited

Applicant

Juja Road Fancy Store Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated an arguable appeal warranting a stay of execution.
  2. 2 Whether the intended appeal would be rendered nugatory if a stay is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether compliance with the High Court order would compel the applicant to breach statutory provisions.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicant had satisfied both limbs required for the grant of a stay under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. First, the applicant demonstrated that it had an arguable appeal, particularly regarding the legal and practical impossibility of reversing share entries and the potential breach of statutory provisions. Second, the Court was persuaded that, absent a stay, the intended appeal would be rendered nugatory, as the respondent had already sought to have the applicant's officers committed to civil jail for non-compliance with the High Court order. The risk of imprisonment and the irreversible consequences of executing the order justified the grant of a...

Court Disposition

Application for stay of execution allowed in part; stay granted as per prayers 1 and 2; costs in the appeal.

Orders

  • There shall be an order of stay in the terms contained in prayers 1 and 2 of the motion.
  • Orders sought in prayers 3 and 4 are rejected.