[2018] KEELC 3941 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 3941 (KLR)

The court found that there was no basis for granting a stay of execution because the applicant's appeal against the original judgment had already been dismissed and the related suit (Environment Court Case No. 195 of 2016) had been struck out. The court emphasized that the continued litigation was circuitous and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 3941 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kiplagat Kotut; Respondent: Rose Jebor Kipngok
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 691 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Determination of Related Suit
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
A Ombwayo
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Specific Performance, Vesting Orders, Eviction Proceedings
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Specific Performance Vesting Orders Eviction 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kiplagat Kotut

Applicant

Rose Jebor Kipngok

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Determination of Related Suit

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a stay of execution of the decree pending determination of Environment Court Case No. 195 of 2016.
  2. 2 Whether the continued occupation of the suit land by the applicant is justified after dismissal of his appeal and the related suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no basis for granting a stay of execution because the applicant's appeal against the original judgment had already been dismissed and the related suit (Environment Court Case No. 195 of 2016) had been struck out. The court emphasized that the continued litigation was circuitous and amounted to an abuse of court process. Since the applicant had exhausted all avenues of appeal and there was no pending substantive matter, the application for stay was dismissed to bring the litigation to an end.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The application dated 15.12.2016 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.