[2012] KEHC 2193 (KLR)

[2012] KEHC 2193 (KLR)

The court found that the appellants had demonstrated substantial loss would result if stay was not granted, as they faced possible imprisonment for non-payment of the decreed sums. The application for stay was made without unreasonable delay, and the appellants were willing to provide security as required. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] KEHC 2193 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Eunice Auma Odera; Appellant: Peter Odero Wadeya; Appellant: Jairus Ogola Owiti; Appellant: Evans Omondi Odhiambo; Appellant: Paul Miseh; Respondent: Migori Teachers Saving & Credit Co-operative Society Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisii
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 200 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for stay of execution pending appeal allowed with conditions.
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Due Performance, Cooperative Societies Disputes, Natural Justice, Appeals Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Stay of Execution Security for Due Performance Cooperative Societies Disputes Natural Justice 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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eunice Auma Odera

Appellant

Peter Odero Wadeya

Appellant

Jairus Ogola Owiti

Appellant

Evans Omondi Odhiambo

Appellant

Paul Miseh

Appellant

Migori Teachers Saving & Credit Co-operative Society Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the appellants have satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether substantial loss may result to the appellants if stay is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the application for stay was made without unreasonable delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellants had demonstrated substantial loss would result if stay was not granted, as they faced possible imprisonment for non-payment of the decreed sums. The application for stay was made without unreasonable delay, and the appellants were willing to provide security as required. The respondent failed to adequately explain why the judgment was not availed to the appellants despite payment of the requisite fee, and discrepancies between the decree and notice to show cause amounts raised concerns. The court was satisfied that the conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal were met and allowed the application on condition that each appellant deposits...

Court Disposition

Application for stay of execution pending appeal allowed with conditions.

Orders

  • Prayer 2 of the application is allowed pending the hearing and determination of the appeal, subject to each appellant depositing security by way of a bank guarantee of Kshs.300,000 or a title deed within 30 days.
  • The respondent shall avail copies of proceedings and judgment to the appellants within 14 days.