[2022] KEHC 10167 (KLR)
The court found that there was no evidence of a notice of appeal or leave to appeal having been granted to the applicant. The conditional stay previously granted was tied to the payment of Kshs. 100,000, which was made, but the substantive application for stay was later dismissed. In the absence of any pending...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 10167 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kirobon Farmers Co. Ltd; Respondent: L R Kipsang & Co Advocates
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 270 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Setting Aside Warrant of Arrest
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- HK Chemitei
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Warrants of Arrest, Taxation of Costs
- 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
Kirobon Farmers Co. Ltd
Applicant
L R Kipsang & Co Advocates
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Setting Aside Warrant of Arrest
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a stay of execution of the warrant of arrest issued on 11th January 2022 pending determination of the application.
- 2 Whether the warrant of arrest should be set aside in light of alleged compliance with previous stay orders and a pending appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was no evidence of a notice of appeal or leave to appeal having been granted to the applicant. The conditional stay previously granted was tied to the payment of Kshs. 100,000, which was made, but the substantive application for stay was later dismissed. In the absence of any pending appeal or stay from the Court of Appeal, there was no legal basis to further stay execution or set aside the warrant of arrest. The certainty of the taxed costs and lack of demonstrated appellate process led the court to dismiss the application with costs to the respondent.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application dated 26th January 2022 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Kirobon Farmers Co. Ltd v L R Kipsang & Co Advocates (Miscellaneous Application 270 of 2016) [2022] KEHC 10167 (KLR) (14 July 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 10167 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nakuru
Miscellaneous Application 270 of 2016
HK Chemitei, J
July 14, 2022
Between
Kirobon Farmers Co. Ltd
Applicant
and
L R Kipsang & Co Advocates
Respondent
Ruling
1. In its application dated 26th January 2022 the applicant prays for the following reliefs;a.That there be stay of execution of the warrants of arrest issued on the 11th January 2022 pending the determination of this application.b.The court does lift and set aside the warrant of arrest issued against the applicant on 11th January 2022 in compliance with the orders of stay issued on the 20th February 2020 to facilitate the matter proceed to the Court of Appeal.
2. The applicant prayed for costs as well.
3. The application is supported on the grounds thereof and the affidavit of Samuel Kimutai Birir the chairman and director of the applicant.
4. The application is opposed by the respondent’s replying affidavit filed on 1st February 2022.
5. When the matter came up for hearing the court directed the same to be disposed by way of written submissions.
6. The court has perused the affidavits and the submissions. The issue herein is the payment of the respondent’s fees. My understanding of the application is that there is a pending appeal hence the need to have execution stayed.
7. The court has perused the court records and there is no evidence of any notice of appeal. At the same time, it is not clear whether the applicant was granted leave to appeal against the ruling of the court.
8. The amount in question is the fees pursuant to a taxation undertaken by the deputy registrar. The amount is certain. It appears the applicant has partially paid the amount in question totalling Kshs. 100,000. The said amount was conditional so as to get a temporary stay. The application was disposed off.
9. If the stay was granted conditionally and later the application was disposed when the court dismissed it, what then is pending for the applicant.? Nothing of course except the appeal. There is no evidence of the appeal shown to this court.
10. The sum total therefore is that in the absence of any appeal or for that matter stay from the Court of Appeal, the application herein stands no chance.
11. The same is therefore dismissed with costs.
DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIA VIDEO LINK THIS 14THDAY OF JULY 2022. H K CHEMITEI.JUDGE