[2021] KECA 835 (KLR)

[2021] KECA 835 (KLR)

The Court found that the applicants failed to provide sufficient material to support their application for stay of execution. Specifically, they did not attach the impugned judgment or notice of appeal, nor did they specify the grounds of the intended appeal. Without this information, the Court could not determine...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KECA 835 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Margaret K. Wambua; Applicant: Kingstone K. Mulewa; Respondent: Mutisya Muindi Mzusyo; Respondent: Beatrice Kavata Wambua
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal (Application) 9 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
J Karanja
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Succession Disputes, Appellate Jurisdiction
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Family and Children Stay of Execution Succession Disputes Appellate Jurisdiction

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Margaret K. Wambua

Applicant

Kingstone K. Mulewa

Applicant

Mutisya Muindi Mzusyo

Respondent

Beatrice Kavata Wambua

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have satisfied the threshold for grant of stay of execution under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the intended appeal is arguable and whether it would be rendered nugatory if stay is not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicants failed to provide sufficient material to support their application for stay of execution. Specifically, they did not attach the impugned judgment or notice of appeal, nor did they specify the grounds of the intended appeal. Without this information, the Court could not determine whether the threshold for granting a stay under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules was met. The applicants did not demonstrate that the intended appeal was arguable or that it would be rendered nugatory if the stay was not granted. Consequently, the application for stay of execution was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for stay of execution is dismissed.
  • No orders as to costs.