[1999] KECA 92 (KLR)

[1999] KECA 92 (KLR)

The Court found that the applicant was only seeking a stay of execution of the order for costs, and there was no suggestion or evidence that the costs, if taxed and paid, would not be recoverable should the intended appeal succeed. In the absence of such evidence, the Court held that there was no basis for granting...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1999] KECA 92 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Chanase Investment Limited; Respondent: Registered Trustee of Kenaya Episcopal Conference
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 54 of 1999
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
JE Gicheru, AB Shah
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Costs Pending Appeal
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Costs Pending Appeal

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chanase Investment Limited

Applicant

Registered Trustee of Kenaya Episcopal Conference

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a stay of execution pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the order for costs can be stayed pending appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicant was only seeking a stay of execution of the order for costs, and there was no suggestion or evidence that the costs, if taxed and paid, would not be recoverable should the intended appeal succeed. In the absence of such evidence, the Court held that there was no basis for granting a stay of execution. Consequently, the application for stay was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for stay of execution is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.