[2001] KECA 236 (KLR)
The court found that, assuming without deciding, the applicant had an arguable appeal and that there was a genuine risk of the appeal being rendered nugatory if a stay was not granted. The court exercised its discretion to grant a stay of execution, but made it conditional upon the applicant depositing half the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2001] KECA 236 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kenya Bus Services Limited; Respondent: Muna Isaack
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application 405 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Conditional stay of execution granted pending appeal.
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Appeals, Conditional Orders
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kenya Bus Services Limited
Applicant
Muna Isaack
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated an arguable appeal warranting a stay of execution.
- 2 Whether there is a genuine risk that the appeal will be rendered nugatory if a stay is not granted.
- 3 What conditions, if any, should be attached to the grant of a stay of execution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, assuming without deciding, the applicant had an arguable appeal and that there was a genuine risk of the appeal being rendered nugatory if a stay was not granted. The court exercised its discretion to grant a stay of execution, but made it conditional upon the applicant depositing half the decretal amount within 21 days and paying the balance to the plaintiff within the same period. Failure to comply with these conditions would result in the lapse of the stay order. This approach balanced the interests of both parties and ensured that the respondent's rights were protected while preserving the applicant's right to appeal.
Court Disposition
Conditional stay of execution granted pending appeal.
Orders
- A stay of execution is granted conditional upon the applicant depositing half the decretal amount within 21 days.
- The applicant must pay the balance to the plaintiff within 21 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: LAKHA, BOSIRE & O'KUBASU, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 405 OF 2001 (215/2002 UR)
BETWEEN
KENYA BUS SERVICES LIMITED ..............................APPLICANT
AND
MUNA ISAACK ........................................................RESPONDENT
(Application for stay of execution pending appeal from the Judgment & Orders of the High Court of Kenya at Meru (Justice Tuiyot) dated the 20th day of June, 2001
in
H.C.C.C. NO. 117 OF 1998) *****************
RULING OF THE COURT:
This is an application for a stay under rule 5(2)(b) of the Rules of this Court. It is made by the unsuccessful defendant. The plaintiff was awarded about 1. 2 million general damagesandspecial damages.
We are prepared to assume, without deciding, that the applicant has an arguable appeal. We are also satisfied that there is a genuine risk of the appeal being rendered nugatory.We prefer to accept the proposal of Mr. Kariuki for a conditional order. Accordingly we grant a stay conditional upon the applicant depositing half the decretal amount within 21 days and paying the balance to the plaintiff also within 21 days failing which this order of stay shall lapse.
The costs of this application shall be costs in the appeal.
Made at Nairobi this 6th day of December, 2001.
A.A. LAKHA
…………………………. JUDGE OF APPEAL
S.E.O. BOSIRE
…………………………. JUDGE OF APPEAL
E. O'KUBASU
………………………….. JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.DEPUTY REGISTRAR