https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kecopt/2026/258

https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kecopt/2026/258

The Tribunal dismissed the application because the Applicant did not demonstrate any new and important evidence, any error apparent on the face of the record, or any other sufficient cause justifying review under Order 45 Rule 1. Since the review threshold was not met, the request to vary the earlier order and grant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KECOPT 258 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: David Wainaina Kihoro; Respondent: John Kihunyu Gitogo
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case E036 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Cooperative Tribunal Ruling on a Notice of Motion for Review and Stay of Execution / Post Judgment Application for Review
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Judges
["J Mwatsama", "B Sawe", "F Lotuiya", "M Chesikaw", "PO Aol"]
Legal Topics
Review of Orders, Stay of Execution, Order 45 Civil Procedure Rules, Error Apparent on the Face of the Record, New and Important Evidence
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Co Operative Law Review of Orders Stay of Execution Order 45 Civil Procedure Rules Error Apparent on the Face of the Record New and Important Evidence

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

Parties

David Wainaina Kihoro

Claimant

John Kihunyu Gitogo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Cooperative Tribunal Ruling on a Notice of Motion for Review and Stay of Execution / Post Judgment Application for Review

  1. 1 Whether the Applicant met the threshold for review of the Tribunal's order under Order 45 Rule 1
  2. 2 Whether stay of execution could be granted through the review application
  3. 3 Whether there was discovery of new evidence, error apparent on the face of the record, or other sufficient cause

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal dismissed the application because the Applicant did not demonstrate any new and important evidence, any error apparent on the face of the record, or any other sufficient cause justifying review under Order 45 Rule 1. Since the review threshold was not met, the request to vary the earlier order and grant stay of execution failed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 12 March 2026 is dismissed with costs.