[2021] KEELC 1903 (KLR)
The court found that the application for stay of execution was made eight months after the decree, constituting unreasonable delay without sufficient explanation. The applicant failed to demonstrate that substantial loss would result from execution, as the loss was limited to the taxed costs, which could be refunded...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELC 1903 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Prof. Francis Ephraim Onyango; Defendant: Georges Aertssen; Defendant: Christine Anyango Okallo; Defendant: Attorney General; Defendant: District Land Registrar Kisumu
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 11 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- conditional stay of execution granted
- Judges
- A Ombwayo
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Appeals, Security for Decree, Taxed 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
Prof. Francis Ephraim Onyango
Plaintiff
Georges Aertssen
Defendant
Christine Anyango Okallo
Defendant
Attorney General
Defendant
District Land Registrar Kisumu
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for stay of execution pending appeal was made without unreasonable delay.
- 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated substantial loss if stay is not granted.
- 3 Whether security for due performance of the decree should be furnished.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application for stay of execution was made eight months after the decree, constituting unreasonable delay without sufficient explanation. The applicant failed to demonstrate that substantial loss would result from execution, as the loss was limited to the taxed costs, which could be refunded if the appeal succeeded. Nonetheless, the court exercised its discretion to grant a conditional stay of execution, requiring the applicant to deposit the decretal amount plus the bill of costs within 30 days as security for the due performance of the decree, in accordance with Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Court Disposition
conditional stay of execution granted
Orders
- Stay of execution pending appeal is granted on condition that the applicant deposits the decretal amount plus the bill of costs within 30 days from the date of the ruling.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT KISUMU
ELC CASE NO. 11 OF 2012
PROF. FRANCIS EPHRAIM ONYANGO.......................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
GEORGES AERTSSEN...........................................................................1ST DEFENDANT
CHRISTINE ANYANGO OKALLO.......................................................2ND DEFENDANT
ATTORNEY GENERAL..........................................................................3RD DEFENDANT
DISTRICT LAND REGISTRAR KISUMU...........................................4TH DEFENDANT
RULING
The application dated 8/6/2020 is for stay of execution pending appeal. The Judgment was delivered on 26/7/2019. The defendants/applicants claim in the counter claim was dismissed with costs. The applicant filed a notice of appeal. A decree was issued on 24/9/2019. The costs were taxed at Kshs. 221,630. A certificate of costs was issued on 4/3/2020.
Grant of stay of execution pending appeal is provided for under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the relevant part of which states as follows:
“(1) No appeal or second appeal shall operate as a stay of execution or proceedings under a decree or order appealed from except appeal case of in so far as the court appealed from may order but, the Court Appealed from may for sufficient cause order stay of execution of such decree or order, and whether the application for such stay shall have been granted or refused by the court appealed from, the court to which such appeal is preferred shall be at liberty, on application being made, to consider such application and to make such order thereon as may to it seem just, and any person aggrieved by an order of stay made by the court from whose decision the appeal is preferred may apply to the appellate court to have such order set aside.
(2) No order for stay of execution shall be made under subrule (1) unless—
(a) the court is satisfied that substantial loss may result to the applicant unless the order is made and that the application has been made without unreasonable delay; and
(b) such security as the court orders for the due performance of such decree or order as may ultimately be binding on him has been given by the applicant.
(3) …
(4) For the purposes of this rule an appeal to the Court of Appeal shall be deemed to have been filed when under the Rules of that Court notice of appeal has been given.
(5) …
(6) Notwithstanding anything contained in subrule (1) of this rule the High Court shall have power in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction to grant a temporary injunction on such terms as it thinks just provided the procedure for instituting an appeal from a subordinate court or tribunal has been complied with.”
The application for stay of execution can only be issued on grounds of being made without unreasonable delay. This application was made 8 months after the date of decree. I do find this to be unreasonable delay and that there is no explanation. The applicant should also demonstrate that he is likely to suffer substantial loss. In this matter the loss that is likely to be suffered is the taxed amount of the bill of costs that does not translate to substantial loss. The same can be refunded by the respondent if the applicant succeeds in the appeal.
However, this court can also require the applicant to furnish security for the performance of the decree.
In the circumstances of this matter, I do order that there be stay of execution pending appeal on condition that the applicant deposits the decretal amount plus the bill of costs as at now within 30 days from today.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021
ANTONY OMBWAYO
JUDGE
This Ruling has been delivered to the parties by electronic mail due to measures restricting court operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic and in the light of the directions issued by his Lordship, the Chief Justice on 15th March 2020.
ANTONY OMBWAYO
JUDGE