[2022] KEHC 422 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 422 (KLR)

The court found that although there was a delay in filing the application for leave to appeal out of time, the delay was not inordinate and was sufficiently explained as being due to late receipt of instructions. The intended appeal on quantum of damages was found to be arguable. The court exercised its discretion...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 422 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Tahmeed Coach; Applicant: Nassor Khalfan; Respondent: Esther Wanjiku Mugumo; Respondent: John Nga’Nga Kabui; Respondent: Peter Njuguna Mungai
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Makueni
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application E045 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Stay of Execution
Outcome
Application allowed in part; leave to appeal out of time and stay of execution granted subject to conditions.
Judges
GMA Dulu
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Stay of Execution, Extension of Time, Security for Due Performance
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Out of Time Stay of Execution Extension of Time Security for Due Performance

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tahmeed Coach

Appellant

Nassor Khalfan

Applicant

Esther Wanjiku Mugumo

Respondent

John Nga’Nga Kabui

Respondent

Peter Njuguna Mungai

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Stay of Execution

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be granted leave to appeal out of time against the judgment of the subordinate court.
  2. 2 Whether a stay of execution of the judgment and decree should be granted pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have provided sufficient security for the due performance of the decree.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although there was a delay in filing the application for leave to appeal out of time, the delay was not inordinate and was sufficiently explained as being due to late receipt of instructions. The intended appeal on quantum of damages was found to be arguable. The court exercised its discretion to grant leave to appeal out of time to avoid injustice. On the issue of stay of execution, the court held that the applicants had demonstrated the likelihood of substantial loss if stay was not granted, and that the grounds of appeal showed a prima facie case with probability of success. The court further held that payment of part of the decretal amount to the respondents would...

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; leave to appeal out of time and stay of execution granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • Leave granted to file appeal out of time within 30 days.
  • Stay of execution of decree or judgment granted pending determination of appeal, subject to payment of Kshs. 700,000 to the respondents within 30 days.