[1999] KECA 176 (KLR)
The Court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that it had an arguable appeal, which is a prerequisite for the grant of a stay of execution under rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. Furthermore, there was no evidence or suggestion that the respondent would be unable to refund the decretal sum if the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1999] KECA 176 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Express (Kenya) Limited; Respondent: Manju Patel
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 122 of 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Appeals, Arguable Appeal, Security for Costs
- 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
Express (Kenya) Limited
Applicant
Manju Patel
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated an arguable appeal to warrant a stay of execution.
- 2 Whether the respondent's ability to refund the decretal sum if the appeal succeeds is in question.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that it had an arguable appeal, which is a prerequisite for the grant of a stay of execution under rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules. Furthermore, there was no evidence or suggestion that the respondent would be unable to refund the decretal sum if the appeal were to succeed. As both essential conditions for granting a stay were not satisfied, the application was dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application for stay of execution is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
7 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: KWACH, TUNOI LAKHA, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 122 OF 1999 (UR. 46/99
EXPRESS (KENYA) LIMITED ............................ APPLICANT AND MANJU PATEL ........................................RESPONDENT
(An application for Stay of Execution from the Ruling and Orders of the High Court at Nairobi (Ole Keiuwa, J.) delivered on 23rd April, 1997inH.C.C.C. NO. 2927 OF 1996) ********************* RULING OF THE COURT
In this application for stay under rule 5 (2) (b) of the Rules of this Court, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that it has an arguable appeal. Moreover, there is not a slight suggestion, even if we had held that the intended appeal was not frivolous, that the respondent is a person of straw and would not be able to refund the decretal sum if the appeal was eventually successful. This application is without merit and is accordingly dismissed with costs.
Made at Nairobi this 8th day of July, 1999.
R. O. KWACH ............... JUDGE OF APPEALP. K. TUNOI ................ JUDGES OF APPEALA. A. LAKHA ............... JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original. DEPUTY REGISTRAR