[2017] KEHC 10100 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 10100 (KLR)

The court found that although the defendant did not file its application for stay of execution within the 14 days after judgment, this did not bar the court from considering the application. The court noted that the plaintiff had not demonstrated it sought or was granted leave to execute the decree prior to taxation...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEHC 10100 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Kenya Programmes for Sustainable Development; Defendant: CFC Stanbic Bank Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
14 December 2017
Case Number
Civil Suit 682 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for stay of execution allowed with conditions.
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Decree, Execution of Judgments, Appeals Process
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Stay of Execution Security for Decree Execution of Judgments Appeals Process

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Programmes for Sustainable Development

Plaintiff

CFC Stanbic Bank Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is entitled to a stay of execution of the decree pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's actions in seeking execution prior to taxation of costs were proper.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's delay in seeking stay of execution bars the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the defendant did not file its application for stay of execution within the 14 days after judgment, this did not bar the court from considering the application. The court noted that the plaintiff had not demonstrated it sought or was granted leave to execute the decree prior to taxation of costs, rendering the execution process potentially premature. The defendant's willingness to provide security for the due performance of the decree meant the plaintiff would not be prejudiced by a stay. The court was also concerned by the plaintiff's conduct, which included attempts to collect the decretal sum directly and a lack of transparency regarding representation....

Court Disposition

Application for stay of execution allowed with conditions.

Orders

  • There shall be a stay of execution until the appeal is heard and determined, conditional on the defendant depositing the decretal sum in a joint interest-earning bank account operated by both parties' advocates.
  • The joint account is to be opened within 7 days; if the plaintiff does not cooperate, the funds may be deposited with the court.