Muthigani v Ndekere & another (Civil Appeal E126 of 2019) [2026] KEHC 5951 (KLR) (30 April 2026) (Ruling)

Since the Appellant was successful and a decree has been issued in his favour, and the security for costs was deposited as a condition for stay, it is just and expedient to release the deposited sum to the Appellant in partial satisfaction of the decree.

Citation: [2026] KEHC 5951 (KLR)
Parties: Appellant: Jobu Muthigani; 1st Respondent: Shadrack Macharia Ndekere; 2nd Respondent: Mbaabu Jacob Julius
Court: High Court
Jurisdiction: Kenya
Judgment Date: 30 April 2026
Case Number: Civil Appeal E126 of 2019
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Ruling on Post Judgment Application for Release of Security for Costs
Outcome: Application allowed
Legal Topics: Security for Costs, Release of Security, Execution of Decree
Source Language: English

Civil Procedure Security for Costs Release of Security Execution of Decree

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

Jobu Muthigani

Appellant

Shadrack Macharia Ndekere

1st Respondent

Mbaabu Jacob Julius

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Post Judgment Application for Release of Security for Costs

Legal Issues

1 Whether the security for costs deposited in court should be released to the Appellant after successful appeal and issuance of decree

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application allowed

Orders

Kshs. 300,000 deposited in court as security for costs to be released to the Appellant through his advocate in partial satisfaction of the decree
No orders as to costs