[2023] KEELC 18103 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 18103 (KLR)

The court held that the application for stay of proceedings before the lower court had already been considered and determined by the trial court, which granted a conditional stay. The appellants failed to comply with the conditions set by the lower court and instead filed a fresh application before the appellate...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 18103 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Robert Nderi Muriithi; Appellant: Antony Kariuki Muriithi; Appellant: Jeremiah Maganjo Muriithi; Respondent: Flora Njeri Muthike; Respondent: Nancy Wangui Ngari; Respondent: Jane Muthoni Zacharia
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kerugoya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal 21 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondents
Judges
JM Mutungi
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Jurisdiction of Courts, Preliminary Objection, Res Judicata
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Stay of Proceedings Jurisdiction of Courts Preliminary Objection Res Judicata

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Nderi Muriithi

Appellant

Antony Kariuki Muriithi

Appellant

Jeremiah Maganjo Muriithi

Appellant

Flora Njeri Muthike

Respondent

Nancy Wangui Ngari

Respondent

Jane Muthoni Zacharia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain a fresh application for stay of proceedings where the lower court has already determined a similar application.
  2. 2 Whether the present application is res judicata and an abuse of court process.
  3. 3 Whether the conditions for stay of proceedings imposed by the lower court were oppressive or warranted review.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application for stay of proceedings before the lower court had already been considered and determined by the trial court, which granted a conditional stay. The appellants failed to comply with the conditions set by the lower court and instead filed a fresh application before the appellate court, rather than seeking a review or variation of the terms. The court found that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain a fresh application on the same issue, as the matter was res judicata and amounted to an abuse of court process. Consequently, the application was dismissed with costs to the respondents.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondents

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated October 6, 2021 is dismissed with costs to the respondents.