[2025] KEHC 4752 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 4752 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or exceptional circumstances that would warrant a stay of proceedings. The inconvenience of litigation does not amount to irreparable harm, and the appeal, if successful, can be accommodated through appropriate remedies without halting...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 4752 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Hon. Kimani Ichung’Wah; Respondent: Danstan Omari
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal E1146 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal
Outcome
application for stay of proceedings dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
TW Cherere
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Interlocutory Injunctions, Defamation, Judicial Discretion
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Tort Law Stay of Proceedings Interlocutory Injunctions Defamation Judicial Discretion

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hon. Kimani Ichung’Wah

Applicant

Danstan Omari

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has met the legal threshold for the grant of an order for stay of proceedings pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if the proceedings are not stayed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or exceptional circumstances that would warrant a stay of proceedings. The inconvenience of litigation does not amount to irreparable harm, and the appeal, if successful, can be accommodated through appropriate remedies without halting the trial. The court emphasized that the right to a fair hearing and expeditious disposal of cases are paramount, and the applicant did not meet the threshold for the grant of a stay. Consequently, the application for stay of proceedings was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application for stay of proceedings dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The notice of motion dated 10th February 2025 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
  • The matter be mentioned before the Deputy Registrar on 29th April 2025 to confirm filing of the Record of Appeal.