[2005] KECA 129 (KLR)

[2005] KECA 129 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that since the applicant failed to comply with the High Court's order to deposit KES 130,000 as a condition for stay, execution proceeded and titles were issued. As a result, there was nothing left for the Court to stay. The application for stay of execution was therefore dismissed as moot....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] KECA 129 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kirop Kanda; Respondent: Gabriel Biwot Kanda; Respondent: Kiptoo Kand Kibor; Respondent: Benjamin Ruto Kanda; Respondent: Kilimo Kanda
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 194 of 2005
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Appeals Process, Execution of Judgments
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Appeals Process Execution of Judgments

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

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

Parties

Kirop Kanda

Applicant

Gabriel Biwot Kanda

Respondent

Kiptoo Kand Kibor

Respondent

Benjamin Ruto Kanda

Respondent

Kilimo Kanda

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal can grant a stay of execution where the decree has already been executed.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a stay of execution pending appeal after failing to comply with the High Court's conditional stay order.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that since the applicant failed to comply with the High Court's order to deposit KES 130,000 as a condition for stay, execution proceeded and titles were issued. As a result, there was nothing left for the Court to stay. The application for stay of execution was therefore dismissed as moot. The costs of the application were ordered to be in the appeal.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The motion dated 12th July, 2005 and filed on the same day is dismissed.
  • The costs of the dismissed motion shall be in the appeal.