[2021] KEHC 6789 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 6789 (KLR)

The court found that there was no ruling delivered by the magistrate on 18th February 2021, but only directions which the applicants had not complied with. As there was no substantive decision or ruling, there was nothing for the High Court to grant leave to appeal against. The application was therefore an abuse of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 6789 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Laureen Omondi Sheen; Applicant: John Okwanyo Ogy; Applicant: Directline Insurance Co; Respondent: Salim Omme Abdulkhalik
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application E086 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay and Leave to Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Leave to Appeal, Abuse of Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Leave to Appeal Abuse of Process

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Laureen Omondi Sheen

Applicant

John Okwanyo Ogy

Applicant

Directline Insurance Co

Applicant

Salim Omme Abdulkhalik

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay and Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to stay of proceedings and execution pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal against the alleged ruling of the magistrate's court should be granted.
  3. 3 Whether there exists a ruling capable of being appealed against.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no ruling delivered by the magistrate on 18th February 2021, but only directions which the applicants had not complied with. As there was no substantive decision or ruling, there was nothing for the High Court to grant leave to appeal against. The application was therefore an abuse of the court process, and the applicants were directed to return to the magistrate's court to prosecute their pending application. The application was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application dated 26th February 2021 is dismissed with costs.
  • Applicants are directed to prosecute their pending application before the magistrate's court.