[1998] KECA 61 (KLR)
The court found that, upon perusal of the record and submissions, the application raised important issues and was urgent. The judge exercised discretion in favour of the applicant, ordering that the application be fixed for hearing before the full court urgently. The urgency was established by the potential...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1998] KECA 61 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Moses Kipngetich Kurgat; Respondent: The Disciplinary Committee of the Law Society
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 163 of 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Application certified as urgent and ordered to be set down for hearing before the full court.
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Disciplinary Proceedings, Professional Suspension
- 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
Moses Kipngetich Kurgat
Applicant
The Disciplinary Committee of the Law Society
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for stay of execution is urgent and should be set down for hearing expeditiously.
- 2 Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if the stay is not granted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, upon perusal of the record and submissions, the application raised important issues and was urgent. The judge exercised discretion in favour of the applicant, ordering that the application be fixed for hearing before the full court urgently. The urgency was established by the potential irreparable harm to the applicant's professional standing if the stay was not granted, and the court was satisfied that the matter warranted expedited consideration despite initial concerns about documentation.
Court Disposition
Application certified as urgent and ordered to be set down for hearing before the full court.
Orders
- The application is to be fixed for hearing before the full Court urgently.
- Costs in the application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
(CORAM: OWUOR, J.A (IN CHAMBERS)
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 163 OF 1999 (UR. 62/99)
BETWEEN
MOSES KIPNGETICH KURGAT ..............................APPLICANT
AND
THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE
OF THE LAW SOCIETY ...................................RESPONDENT
(Application for stay of execution in an intended appeal from the ruling and order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Hon. Justice Aluoch) dated 3rd June, 1999 in H.C.Misc. Application No. 796 of 1997) ******************************
R U L I N G
The applicant, Moses Kipngetich Kurgat is an advocate of the High Court of Kenya. On 2nd day of July, 1999 he filed this application underrule 47 of the Rules of this Court seeking that his application be set down for hearing as a matter of urgency. The ground upon which he sought the order being that the superior court by a ruling delivered by Aluoch, J. had issued orders which if executed;
"the applicant will be occasioned serious irreparable erosion of his professional credibility and which action shall cause unfathomable damage and this application and the intended appeal will be rendered nugatory".
The ruling he alludes to had the effect of, if not stayed confirmning his suspension from the roll of advocates as decided by the Disciplinary Committee of the Law Society of Kenya on the 22nd day of August, 1997.
I did not grant the certificate of urgency mainly on the ground that the copy of the record placed before me at the first instance were undated and uncertified. I have been addressed by both counsel as to why I should or should not exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant.
Upon perusal of the record of the application and considering the submission of counsel on the limited issue of whether or not the application is urgent, I am satisfied that the same is urgent and there are important issues emanating from the application. In that regard I will exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant and order that the application be fixed for hearing before the full Court urgently. Costs in the application.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 3rd day of August, 1998.
E. OWUOR ...............
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR