[2019] KEHC 8568 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 8568 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants had sufficiently explained the delay in filing the memorandum of appeal, attributing it to the time taken to obtain proceedings from the lower court. The court recognized the applicants' right of appeal and the need to balance this against the respondent's right to enjoy the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 8568 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Mutalii Symon Ithiriri; Applicant: Kimathi Derrick; Respondent: Kaleb Jaoko
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 414 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed with conditions.
Judges
A Mbogholi-Msagha
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Judicial Discretion
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Extension of Time Appeals Process Judicial Discretion

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

Mutalii Symon Ithiriri

Applicant

Kimathi Derrick

Applicant

Kaleb Jaoko

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Extension of Time to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time to file a memorandum of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to a stay of execution of the lower court judgment pending appeal.
  3. 3 What conditions should be imposed for the grant of stay of execution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had sufficiently explained the delay in filing the memorandum of appeal, attributing it to the time taken to obtain proceedings from the lower court. The court recognized the applicants' right of appeal and the need to balance this against the respondent's right to enjoy the fruits of judgment. The court held that no party should be penalized for systemic shortcomings of the judiciary, nor should any party take advantage of such shortcomings. Exercising its discretion judicially, the court granted an extension of time to file the memorandum of appeal and allowed a stay of execution of the lower court judgment, subject to the applicants paying part of...

Court Disposition

Application allowed with conditions.

Orders

  • Extension of time to file the memorandum of appeal granted; to be filed within 14 days from the date of the ruling.
  • Stay of execution of the lower court judgment granted, provided the applicants pay KES 1,000,000 to the respondent within 30 days and deposit the balance of the decretal sum in an interest-earning account in the joint names of both advocates within 30 days.