[2023] KEHC 2961 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 2961 (KLR)

The court found that the application for stay of proceedings was not made in good faith, as similar applications had already been made and determined. The issues raised in the application for stay had been addressed in prior applications, including one for recusal. The court emphasized that only the Court of Appeal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 2961 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Juja Coffee Exporters Limited; Plaintiff: Tss Transporters Limited; Plaintiff: Tss Investment Limited; Plaintiff: Tahir Sheikh Said Ahmed; Defendant: Bank Of Africa Limited; Defendant: Kaab Investment Limited; Interested Party: Abdulmajid Mohamed Haji Adam; Interested Party: Shami Motors Limited; Interested Party: IFI Paradise Properties Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Commercial Suit 57 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Commercial Suit / Ruling on Application for Stay Pending Appeal and Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for stay of proceedings dismissed; leave to appeal granted; matter to proceed to hearing immediately.
Judges
DKN Magare
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Leave to Appeal, Recusal of Judge
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Stay of Proceedings Leave to Appeal Recusal of Judge

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Juja Coffee Exporters Limited

Plaintiff

Tss Transporters Limited

Plaintiff

Tss Investment Limited

Plaintiff

Tahir Sheikh Said Ahmed

Plaintiff

Bank Of Africa Limited

Defendant

Kaab Investment Limited

Defendant

Abdulmajid Mohamed Haji Adam

Interested Party

Shami Motors Limited

Interested Party

IFI Paradise Properties Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial Suit / Ruling on Application for Stay Pending Appeal and Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the application for stay of proceedings pending appeal should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted.
  3. 3 Whether the issues raised in the application for stay have already been addressed in prior applications.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for stay of proceedings was not made in good faith, as similar applications had already been made and determined. The issues raised in the application for stay had been addressed in prior applications, including one for recusal. The court emphasized that only the Court of Appeal or an order from that court could stay the proceedings at this stage. The matter had been pending for seven years, and further delay would be contrary to the constitutional imperative for expeditious disposal of cases. The court granted leave to appeal but dismissed the application for stay, ordering the matter to proceed to hearing immediately.

Court Disposition

Application for stay of proceedings dismissed; leave to appeal granted; matter to proceed to hearing immediately.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted.
  • Application for stay of proceedings is dismissed.