[2023] KEELC 18482 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 18482 (KLR)

The court found that the conditional stay of execution granted by Olola J was self-executory and expressly provided that failure to deposit Kshs 100,000/- within 30 days would result in the dismissal of the application with costs. The respondent failed to comply with this condition since October 2, 2020 and did not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 18482 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mutaha Ahmed Dahman; Plaintiff: Alamin Ahmed Dahman (Suing As Administrators Of The Estate Of Maliam Bin Said); Defendant: Athman Sudi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 24 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application to Vacate Stay Orders
Outcome
application allowed; previous application dismissed with costs
Judges
EK Makori
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Conditional Orders, Non Compliance With Court Orders, Vacation of Stay, Appeals Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Stay of Execution Conditional Orders Non Compliance With Court Orders Vacation of Stay Appeals Process

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

Parties

Mutaha Ahmed Dahman

Plaintiff

Alamin Ahmed Dahman (Suing As Administrators Of The Estate Of Maliam Bin Said)

Plaintiff

Athman Sudi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application to Vacate Stay Orders

  1. 1 Whether the conditional stay of execution granted by Olola J should be vacated due to non-compliance with the deposit condition.
  2. 2 Whether further adjournment should be granted to allow respondent's counsel to cease acting.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the conditional stay of execution granted by Olola J was self-executory and expressly provided that failure to deposit Kshs 100,000/- within 30 days would result in the dismissal of the application with costs. The respondent failed to comply with this condition since October 2, 2020 and did not provide any explanation for the default. The court held that there was no basis for further adjournment to allow the respondent's counsel to cease acting, as the operative orders had already taken effect by operation of law. Consequently, the application to vacate the stay was allowed, and the earlier application for stay stood dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

application allowed; previous application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application dated May 5, 2023 is allowed with costs.
  • The application dated October 24, 2019 stands dismissed with costs.