[2021] KEHC 5018 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 5018 (KLR)

The court found that the application for stay of execution was made without unreasonable delay, as it was filed slightly more than one month after the judgment and after the appeal had been lodged. The court determined that the applicants would suffer substantial loss if stay was not granted, given that the main...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 5018 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Mash East Africa; Appellant: Khamis Abdulrahim Mohammed; Respondent: Stephen Kyalo
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Makueni
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal E002 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
application allowed with conditions
Judges
GMA Dulu
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Due Performance, Substantial Loss, Appeal Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Security for Due Performance Substantial Loss Appeal 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mash East Africa

Appellant

Khamis Abdulrahim Mohammed

Appellant

Stephen Kyalo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to a stay of execution of the judgment pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the application for stay was made without unreasonable delay.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have demonstrated that they will suffer substantial loss if stay is not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for stay of execution was made without unreasonable delay, as it was filed slightly more than one month after the judgment and after the appeal had been lodged. The court determined that the applicants would suffer substantial loss if stay was not granted, given that the main contention on appeal was the quantum of damages. The court exercised its discretion to grant a stay of execution on condition that the applicants pay part of the decretal amount as security. The payment of Kshs.100,000 to the respondent within 30 days was ordered as a condition for the stay, failing which the stay would lapse. Costs of the application were ordered to abide the...

Court Disposition

application allowed with conditions

Orders

  • Stay of execution of judgment or decree pending appeal is granted.
  • The applicants shall pay the respondent Kshs.100,000 as part of the decretal amount within 30 days from the date of the ruling.