[2014] KEHC 6568 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 6568 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any substantial loss that would be suffered if the taxed costs were paid to the respondent. Additionally, the applicant did not show that the respondent would be unable to refund the costs should the appeal succeed. The court emphasized that the conditions for...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 6568 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Charles Sigu Otieno; Respondent: John Owuor Angasa
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 94 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
HK Chemitei
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Costs, Appeal Dismissal
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Security for Costs Appeal Dismissal

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Sigu Otieno

Appellant

John Owuor Angasa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient grounds for grant of stay of execution pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether substantial loss will be suffered by the applicant if stay is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether sufficient security has been provided by the applicant as required by law.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any substantial loss that would be suffered if the taxed costs were paid to the respondent. Additionally, the applicant did not show that the respondent would be unable to refund the costs should the appeal succeed. The court emphasized that the conditions for granting stay pending appeal, including demonstration of substantial loss and provision of security, were not met by the applicant. Consequently, the application for stay was found to lack merit and was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The application for stay pending appeal is dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.