[2023] KEHC 1066 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 1066 (KLR)

The court found that the 1st defendant filed the application for stay of execution within the 30-day period of the initial stay granted at judgment, thus there was no undue delay. The applicant demonstrated willingness to deposit security for costs, and the court was satisfied that failure to grant a stay could...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 1066 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission; Defendant: Rebecca Nabutola; Defendant: Ong’Ong’A Achieng; Defendant: Duncan Muriuki; Defendant: Maniago Safaris Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Civil Suit 30 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
application for stay of execution pending appeal granted with conditions
Judges
EN Maina
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Costs, Appeal Process, Threshold for Stay, Timeliness of Application
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Anti Corruption and Economic Crimes Stay of Execution Security for Costs Appeal Process Threshold for Stay Timeliness of Application

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission

Plaintiff

Rebecca Nabutola

Defendant

Ong’Ong’A Achieng

Defendant

Duncan Muriuki

Defendant

Maniago Safaris Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the 1st defendant has satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the application for stay was brought without undue delay.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is willing to provide security for the due performance of the decree.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 1st defendant filed the application for stay of execution within the 30-day period of the initial stay granted at judgment, thus there was no undue delay. The applicant demonstrated willingness to deposit security for costs, and the court was satisfied that failure to grant a stay could render the appeal nugatory. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to grant a stay of execution on condition that the entire decretal sum is deposited in court within 14 days. Failure to comply would result in the lapse of the stay order. The court also ordered that the 1st defendant bear the costs of the application.

Court Disposition

application for stay of execution pending appeal granted with conditions

Orders

  • Stay of execution of the judgment is granted provided the entire decretal sum is deposited in court within 14 days of the ruling date.
  • If the decretal sum is not deposited as directed, the order for stay shall lapse.