[2020] KECA 282 (KLR)
The Court found that while the applicants had demonstrated the existence of an arguable appeal, they failed to satisfy the second prerequisite under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, namely, that the appeal would be rendered nugatory if the orders sought were not granted. The applicants did not controvert...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KECA 282 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Dr. Evans Odhiambo Kidero; Applicant: Dr. Susan Akello Mboya; Applicant: Dr. Evans Odhiambo Kidero (Suing on behalf of the Estate of the late Abigael Atieno Kidero); Applicant: Dr. Evans Odhiambo Kidero (Suing on behalf of the Estate of the late Philip Ayot Kidero); Applicant: Gem Investments; Applicant: Gem Apartments; Applicant: Gem Suites; Applicant: Orro Limited; Applicant: Argenti Limited; Applicant: Paul Aol; Respondent: The Chief Magistrate of Milimani Law Courts; Respondent: Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: Director of Criminal Investigations; Respondent: Hon. Attorney General
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal (Application) 242 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Application for Injunction Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- RN Nambuye, DK Musinga
- Legal Topics
- Interlocutory Injunctions, Stay of Execution, Appeals Process, Asset Seizure
- 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. Evans Odhiambo Kidero
Applicant
Dr. Susan Akello Mboya
Applicant
Dr. Evans Odhiambo Kidero (Suing on behalf of the Estate of the late Abigael Atieno Kidero)
Applicant
Dr. Evans Odhiambo Kidero (Suing on behalf of the Estate of the late Philip Ayot Kidero)
Applicant
Gem Investments
Applicant
Gem Apartments
Applicant
Gem Suites
Applicant
Orro Limited
Applicant
Argenti Limited
Applicant
Paul Aol
Applicant
The Chief Magistrate of Milimani Law Courts
Respondent
Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission
Respondent
Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Director of Criminal Investigations
Respondent
Hon. Attorney General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Injunction Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated an arguable appeal to warrant grant of an injunction pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the applicants have shown that the appeal would be rendered nugatory if the injunction is not granted.
- 3 Whether both prerequisites under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules have been satisfied.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that while the applicants had demonstrated the existence of an arguable appeal, they failed to satisfy the second prerequisite under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, namely, that the appeal would be rendered nugatory if the orders sought were not granted. The applicants did not controvert the 2nd respondent's averments that the ongoing investigations, prosecution, and asset recovery proceedings were unlikely to be concluded before the appeal is heard and determined. As both prerequisites must be met, the application for injunction and stay was declined.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The Notice of Motion dated 19th June, 2020 is declined.
- Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
51 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
(CORAM: NAMBUYE, MUSINGA & GATEMBU JJ.A.)
CIVIL APPEAL (APPLICATION) NO. 242 OF 2020
BETWEEN
DR. EVANS ODHIAMBO KIDERO...............................................1STAPPLICANT
DR. SUSAN AKELLO MBOYA....................................................2NDAPPLICANT
DR. EVANS ODHIAMBO KIDERO (Suing on behalf of the Estate of the late
ABIGAEL ATIENO KIDERO)........................................................3RDAPPLICANT
DR. EVANS ODHIAMBO KIDERO (Suing on behalf of the Estate of the late
PHILIP AYOT KIDERO)................................................................4THAPPLICANT
GEM INVESTMENTS......................................................................5THAPPLICANT
GEM APARTMENTS.......................................................................6THAPPLICANT
GEM SUITES..................................................................................7THAPPLICANT
ORRO LIMITED............................................................................8THAPPLICANT
ARGENTI LIMITED........................................................................9THAPPLICANT
PAUL AOL...................................................................................10THAPPLICANT
VERSUS
THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE OF
MILIMANI LAW COURTS.......................................................1STRESPONDENT
ETHICS AND ANTI-CORRUPTION COMMISSION............2NDRESPONDENT
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS...........................3RDRESPONDENT
DIRECTOR OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS.....................4THRESPONDENT
HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL...................................................5THRESPONDENT
(Being an application for injunction pending the hearing and determination
of the Appeal from the Judgment and Decree of the High Court of Kenya
(Hon. Mumbi Ngugi, J.) dated 4thJune, 2020 inNairobi Petition No. 25 of 2018)
***********************
RULING OF THE COURT
1. UPONperusing the Notice of Motion dated 19th June 2020 by the applicants seeking an order to stay the judgment of Hon. Lady Justice Mumbi Ngugi dated 4th June, 2020 pending hearing and determination of the appeal; an order of temporary injunction restraining the 2nd respondent through any of its agents, officers or investigators from any further execution of the search warrant issued against the 1st Applicant dated 19th September, 2018 pending the hearing and determination of Civil Appeal No. 242 of 2020 Dr. Evans Kidero & Others vs. EACC & Othersalready filed in this Court; an order of injunction restraining the 2nd respondent through any of its agents, officers or investigators from purporting to search, seize and continue to seize the 2nd - 10th Applicants’ properties pending the hearing and determination of Civil Appeal No. 242 of 2020 Dr. Evans Kidero & 7 Others vs. EACC & Others already filed in this Court.; and an order that costs of the application do abide the outcome of this Appeal; and
2. UPONreading the grounds in the body of the application and supporting affidavit of Dr. Evans Odhiambo Kidero together with annexures thereto; and
3. UPONreading the 2nd respondent’s replying affidavit sworn byPaul Mugwetogether with annexures thereto; and
4. UPONappraising the applicant’s and 2nd respondent’s written submissions dated 25th June, 2020 and 27th June, 2020 respectively in support of their rival positions; and
5. HAVINGconsidered the Memorandum of Appeal already filed in light of the principles that guide this Court in determining applications under Rule 5(2)(b) of this Court’s Rules as summarized in Stanley Kangethe vs. Tony Ketter & Others [2013]eKLR, and which we fully adopt, we are satisfied that the applicants have satisfied the first of the twin principles that guide the court in the exercise of its mandate under the said rule, namely demonstration of existence of an arguable appeal irrespective of its ultimate success and /or otherwise; and
6. HAVINGapplied the same test with regard to the need to satisfy the second prerequisite, namely demonstration that failure to grant the order sought will render the appeal filed nugatory, we do not think that the second prerequisite has been satisfied. The applicant has failed to controvert the 2nd respondent’s averments in their replying affidavit that pending completion of investigations, filing, prosecution, and conclusion of the criminal case(s) against the applicants and the filing of the asset recovery suit, which actions are yet to commence, are unlikely to be concluded before the appeal which is already filed is heard and determined; and
7. HAVINGappreciated that in order to succeed underrule 5(2) (b)of the Court’s Rules both prerequisites must be satisfied; and
8. HAVINGreached the above conclusion, we make orders as follows:
(i) The Notice of Motion dated 19thJune, 2020 is declined.
(ii) Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal. Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 9thday of October, 2020.
R. N. NAMBUYE
.....................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
D. K. MUSINGA
......................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
S. GATEMBU KAIRU FCIArb
...................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
Signed
DEPUTY REGISTRAR