[2018] KEELC 306 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 306 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient cause to warrant a stay of execution of the decree. The court further held that the challenge to auctioneers fees was improperly raised in this application and should be addressed in the appropriate forum. The court noted that the applicant had...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 306 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Francis Okello; Respondent: Alexander Ochwo Alela
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 478 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
LC Komingoi
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Auctioneers Fees, Decree Enforcement
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Stay of Execution Auctioneers Fees Decree Enforcement

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Francis Okello

Applicant

Alexander Ochwo Alela

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient cause to warrant a stay of execution of the decree.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant can challenge auctioneers fees in this forum.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to a 90-day period to offset the proclaimed amount and auctioneers fees.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient cause to warrant a stay of execution of the decree. The court further held that the challenge to auctioneers fees was improperly raised in this application and should be addressed in the appropriate forum. The court noted that the applicant had previously sought time to pay but had not shown any effort to offset the amounts due in the nearly two years since the application. Consequently, the application was dismissed for lack of merit.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with no orders as to costs.