[2018] KEELC 479 (KLR)
The court found that the Notice of Appeal was filed out of time, contrary to Rule 75 of the Court of Appeal Rules, which requires filing within 14 days of judgment. The court further held that the defendants failed to demonstrate sufficient cause or provide security for the performance of the decree as required...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 479 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Grace Jendeka Lusiola; Defendant: Elias Mbai Ndungu; Defendant: Paul Irungu Kamau; Defendant: John Munene Nyagah; Defendant: Jennifer Gathoni; Defendant: Florence Wakonyo; Defendant: Samuel Wambugu; Defendant: Mary Njeri; Defendant: Raphael Muiru; Defendant: John Ngugi Njuguna; Defendant: Florence Muriithi; Defendant: George Kiura Mugo; Defendant: Raphael Ndirangu Matu; Defendant: Jacinta W Karanja; Defendant: James Kamau Kitati; Defendant: Virginia W Karanja; Defendant: Paul Nganga Nderitu; Defendant: Henry Gitau Ndirangu; Defendant: Doris K. Maitima; Defendant: Joseph Munyao Katiku; Defendant: Lucy Wangari Kamau
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 650 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs to the plaintiff; leave granted to defendants to appoint a new advocate
- Judges
- AK Bor
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Appeal Timelines, Security for Performance, Residential Property Disputes
- 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
Grace Jendeka Lusiola
Plaintiff
Elias Mbai Ndungu
Defendant
Paul Irungu Kamau
Defendant
John Munene Nyagah
Defendant
Jennifer Gathoni
Defendant
Florence Wakonyo
Defendant
Samuel Wambugu
Defendant
Mary Njeri
Defendant
Raphael Muiru
Defendant
John Ngugi Njuguna
Defendant
Florence Muriithi
Defendant
George Kiura Mugo
Defendant
Raphael Ndirangu Matu
Defendant
Jacinta W Karanja
Defendant
James Kamau Kitati
Defendant
Virginia W Karanja
Defendant
Paul Nganga Nderitu
Defendant
Henry Gitau Ndirangu
Defendant
Doris K. Maitima
Defendant
Joseph Munyao Katiku
Defendant
Lucy Wangari Kamau
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendants are entitled to a stay of execution of the decree pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the Notice of Appeal was filed within the prescribed time under Rule 75 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
- 3 Whether sufficient cause and security for the performance of the decree have been shown by the defendants.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Notice of Appeal was filed out of time, contrary to Rule 75 of the Court of Appeal Rules, which requires filing within 14 days of judgment. The court further held that the defendants failed to demonstrate sufficient cause or provide security for the performance of the decree as required under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court exercised its discretion to deny the stay of execution, finding no basis to grant the orders sought. However, the court granted the defendants leave to appoint a new advocate.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs to the plaintiff; leave granted to defendants to appoint a new advocate
Orders
- The application for stay of execution is dismissed with costs to the plaintiff.
- The defendants are granted leave to appoint a new advocate.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
40 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
ELC. CASE NO. 650 OF 2012
GRACE JENDEKA LUSIOLA...............................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ELIAS MBAU NDUNGU............................................1ST DEFENDANT
PAUL IRUNGU KAMAU.............................................2ND DEFENDANT
JOHN MUNENE NYAGAH.......................................3RD DEFENDANT
JENNIFER GATHONI...............................................4TH DEFENDANT
FLORENCE WAKONYO..........................................5TH DEFENDANT
SAMUEL WAMBUGU................................................6TH DEFENDANT
MARY NJERI..............................................................7TH DEFENDANT
RAPHAEL MUIRU.......................................................8TH DEFENDANT
JOHN NGUGI NJUGUNA.........................................9TH DEFENDANT
FLORENCE MURIITHI...........................................10TH DEFENDANT
GEORGE KIURA MUGO.........................................11TH DEFENDANT
RAPHAEL NDIRANGU MATU................................12TH DEFENDANT
JACINTA W KARANJA...........................................13TH DEFENDANT
JAMES KAMAU KITATI.........................................14TH DEFENDANT
VIRGINIA W KARANJA.........................................15TH DEFENDANT
PAUL NGANGA NDERITU......................................16TH DEFENDANT
HENRY GITAU NDIRANGU...................................17TH DEFENDANT
DORIS K. MAITIMA...............................................18TH DEFENDANT
JOSEPH MUNYAO KATIKU..................................19TH DEFENDANT
LUCY WANGARI KAMAU......................................20TH DEFENDANT
RULING
Through the application dated 20/6/2018, the Defendants seek stay of execution of the decree and judgment delivered by this court on 30/5/208. They also seek to appoint a new advocate. They argue that they have commenced the process of appealing to the Court of Appeal by filing a Notice of Appeal. They argue that they stand to suffer great loss if execution of the decree proceeds since they have developed residential buildings on the suit property and that their appeal will be rendered nugatory if execution proceeds. They attached a copy of the Notice of Appeal filed on 19/6/2018 which is undated. The Deputy Registrar endorsed on it that it was lodged on 19/6/2018.
The Plaintiff filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection urging that the Notice of Appeal is time barred by Rule 75 of the Court of Appeal Rules which requires a notice of appeal to be filed within 14 days of the date of the judgement.
Parties made oral submissions. The Defendants urged that there was no delay in filing the application and that they are willing to offer security for the performance of the decree. The Defendants urged that there were two public holidays on 1/6/2018 and 15/6/2018 which should not be included in computing the time within which to lodge an appeal.
The Defendants have filed another application in the Court of Appeal seeking orders of stay of execution. The advocate argued that the orders sought in the application for stay of execution before the Court of Appeal are different from those sought in this court. The Plaintiff relied on Rule 75 of the Court of Appeal Rules and urged that the Notice of Appeal was filed 21 days after judgement. The Plaintiff further submitted that the Defendants have sought similar orders from the Court of Appeal and that this court should dismiss the application. The court agrees with the Plaintiff that the Notice of Appeal was filed out of time.
Stay of execution pending appeal is discretionary and is governed by Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Sufficient cause has to be shown and the Applicant must show that he will suffer substantial loss. The application should be made without delay and the Applicant must furnish security as the court may impose.
Having considered the application the court is not satisfied that the Defendants have shown sufficient cause or provided security for the grant of the orders of stay of execution. The application is dismissed with costs to the Plaintiff. The Defendants are granted leave to appoint a new advocate.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 6th day of December 2018.
K. BOR
JUDGE
In the presence of: -
Mr. Mureithi holding brief for Mr. Burugu for the Plaintiff
Mr. V. Owuor- Court Assistant
No appearance for the Defendants