[2021] KECPT 11 (KLR)

[2021] KECPT 11 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that the application for stay of execution dated 28.9.2017 had already been heard and dismissed by a ruling delivered on 13.7.2018, with the orders applying to all consolidated matters. There was no evidence of any subsisting stay or other order preventing execution. Although an appeal was noted,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KECPT 11 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Insurers Sacco Limited; Respondent: John O. Makokha
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case 448 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Directions on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Claimant allowed to proceed with execution; matters not dismissed.
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Affidavit to Show Cause, Stay of Execution, Execution Proceedings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Affidavit to Show Cause Stay of Execution Execution Proceedings

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Insurers Sacco Limited

Applicant

John O. Makokha

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Directions on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the matters should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant has shown sufficient cause to prevent dismissal.
  3. 3 Whether there are pending applications or appeals affecting the execution process.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the application for stay of execution dated 28.9.2017 had already been heard and dismissed by a ruling delivered on 13.7.2018, with the orders applying to all consolidated matters. There was no evidence of any subsisting stay or other order preventing execution. Although an appeal was noted, its status was not disclosed and no stay was shown to be in force. The claimant demonstrated readiness to proceed with execution. Accordingly, the Tribunal held that there was no sufficient cause to dismiss the matters for want of prosecution and directed that the claimant may proceed with execution unless contrary orders exist.

Court Disposition

Claimant allowed to proceed with execution; matters not dismissed.

Orders

  • The claimant is to proceed with execution in CTC.NO.448/2014, CTC.NO.449/2014, CTC.NO.450/2014, and CTC.NO.451/2014 unless there are other orders to the contrary.