[1998] KECA 137 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal determined that, while the merits of the intended appeal could not be assessed at this interlocutory stage, the execution of the maintenance order through attachment and auction of the applicant's property could render the appeal nugatory and would not necessarily benefit either party due to the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1998] KECA 137 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Dr. Wilson Mwonga Ngoka; Respondent: Anne Ndinda Ngoka
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 175 of 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- conditional stay of execution granted
- Legal Topics
- Maintenance Pending Appeal, Stay of Execution, Attachment and Auction, Spousal Support Orders
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Dr. Wilson Mwonga Ngoka
Applicant
Anne Ndinda Ngoka
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a stay of execution should be granted pending appeal against a maintenance order.
- 2 Whether the applicant's inability to pay justifies a stay of execution.
- 3 Whether execution by auction would render the appeal nugatory or cause irreparable harm.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal determined that, while the merits of the intended appeal could not be assessed at this interlocutory stage, the execution of the maintenance order through attachment and auction of the applicant's property could render the appeal nugatory and would not necessarily benefit either party due to the typically low returns from forced sales. The court found it just to grant a conditional stay of execution, requiring the applicant to make a lump sum payment followed by monthly payments, thereby balancing the interests of both parties and ensuring some support for the respondent while preserving the subject matter of the appeal.
Court Disposition
conditional stay of execution granted
Orders
- The applicant shall pay Shs.100,000 to the respondent within the next seven days.
- With effect from 15th August, 1998, the applicant shall pay Shs.15,000 per month to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: OMOLO, TUNOI & SHAH JJ.A) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI.175 OF 1998 (66/98 UR)
BETWEEN
DR. WILSON MWONGA NGOKA.............................APPLICANT
AND
ANNE NDINDA NGOKA...................................RESPONDENT
(Application for stay of execution in an intended Appeal from a Ruling and Order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mr. Justice Mbogholi Msagha) dated 15/10/97) IN H.C.D.C. NO. 2 OF 1997 ******************
RULING OF THE COURT
The applicant who is a practicing Gynecologist in Nairobi seeks stay of orders of maintenance mandate lite made against him by the superior court on 15th October, 1997 on the grounds that he is unable to pay the sum in question. He has produced his auditor's reports of the accounts for three years. In 1995 he earned net sum of Shs.78,000 at odd. The learned judge in the superior court ordered that he pays Shs.45,000 per month effective 1st November, 1997.
The applicant concedes that he has not paid a single cent and has therefore made no attempt whatsoever to comply with the order of the superior court.
Whatever be the merits of the intended appeal, we are at this stage, not able to quite forecast the same. The second issue we have to consider is whether the appeal, if successful, will be rendered nugatory. There is already an attachment order issued and it appears that the warrant may be executed any moment now. Auctioning of properties attached may not eventually be of benefit to both parties as it is well known that forced auction sales do not fetch much by way of bids.
We are of the view that considering all the circumstances it may not be of advantage to the respondent if the applicant's office furniture is auctioned. The order that appears just to us is that the applicant pays Shs.100,000 within the next seven days to the respondent and that thereafter with effect from the 15th August, 1998 per month a sum of Shs.15,000. The applicant will of course pay the auctioneer's charges. These are our orders that is to say that the stay of execution sought is granted on conditions that
(1) The applicant pays Shs.100,000 within the next seven days and
(2) that with effect from 15th August, 1998 he pays a sum of Shs.15,000 per month and
(3) that he pays the court order's charges.
The costs of this application will be costs in the intended appeal.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 31st day of July, 1998.
R.S.C. OMOLO
.............
JUDGE OF APPEAL
P.K. TUNOI
..............
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A.B. SHAH
...............
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR