[2015] KEHC 7058 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 7058 (KLR)

The court found that there was no memorandum of appeal on record, which is a mandatory requirement for the commencement of a civil appeal under Order 42 rule 1(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Without a memorandum of appeal, there is no valid appeal in existence. Consequently, the application for stay of execution,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 7058 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: J W B; Respondent: R N K
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 23 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
application struck out
Judges
DN Musyoka
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Memorandum of Appeal Requirement, Children Court Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Family and Children Stay of Execution Memorandum of Appeal Requirement Children Court Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J W B

Appellant

R N K

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether an application for stay of execution can be entertained in the absence of a filed memorandum of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the motion dated 24th April 2014 is competent in law.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no memorandum of appeal on record, which is a mandatory requirement for the commencement of a civil appeal under Order 42 rule 1(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Without a memorandum of appeal, there is no valid appeal in existence. Consequently, the application for stay of execution, which is interlocutory in nature and must be filed within an existing appeal, is incompetent. The motion is not an originating process and, in the absence of a valid appeal, it cannot be sustained. The application is therefore misconceived, incompetent, and an abuse of the court process, warranting its striking out.

Court Disposition

application struck out

Orders

  • The Motion dated 24th April 2014 is struck out.
  • The respondent shall have the costs of the application.