[2022] KEHC 3150 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had satisfied the requirements for stay of execution pending appeal. The application was filed without unreasonable delay, particularly considering the Covid-19 pandemic context. The respondent's financial means were not disclosed, raising the possibility of substantial loss to the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 3150 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: James Kamau Njenga; Respondent: Nyamao Erickson John
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Makueni
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal E015 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for stay of execution granted on condition of part payment of decretal sum.
- Judges
- GMA Dulu
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Money Decree, Security for Costs, Substantial Loss, Delay in Filing, Quantum of Damages
- 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
James Kamau Njenga
Applicant
Nyamao Erickson John
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution of judgment or decree pending appeal.
- 2 Whether substantial loss may result to the applicant if stay is not granted.
- 3 Whether the application was filed without unreasonable delay.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had satisfied the requirements for stay of execution pending appeal. The application was filed without unreasonable delay, particularly considering the Covid-19 pandemic context. The respondent's financial means were not disclosed, raising the possibility of substantial loss to the applicant if the decretal sum is paid and the appeal succeeds. The court held that part payment of the decretal amount (Kshs.80,000) within 60 days would suffice as security for the due performance of the decree. The court was not persuaded by the applicant's proposal for a bank guarantee and instead ordered part payment as a condition for stay. The stay of execution would...
Court Disposition
Application for stay of execution granted on condition of part payment of decretal sum.
Orders
- Stay of execution of judgment or decree is granted pending determination of appeal.
- The stay is subject to the appellant/applicant paying the respondent through counsel part of the decretal amount Kshs.80,000 within 60 days from the date of the ruling.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
Njenga v John (Civil Appeal E015 of 2021) [2022] KEHC 3150 (KLR) (12 May 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 3150 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Makueni
Civil Appeal E015 of 2021
GMA Dulu, J
May 12, 2022
Between
James Kamau Njenga
Applicant
and
Nyamao Erickson John
Respondent
Ruling
1. This is an application by way of Notice of Motion dated 26th March 2021 brought under section 3A, 75G and 95 of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap. 21), and Order 22 Rule 22 and Order 42 Rule 6 Order 50 Rule 6, and Order 51 Rules 1 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
2. The applicant seeks a number of orders, some of which have been spent as follows –1)(Spent)2)(Spent)3)That the court be pleased to stay the execution of the judgment/decree obtained herein pending the hearing and determination of the appellant’s/applicant’s appeal filed in the High Court of Kenya.4)(Spent).5)That the costs of the application abide the outcome of the appeal.
3. The application has grounds on the face of the Notice of Motion that general damages of Kshs.180,000/= and special damages of Kshs.3,550/= had been awarded by the trial court on 12th March 2021, that the appellant had now filed an appeal, and that the appeal will be rendered nugatory if the appeal is successful and the decretal amount is not be refunded by the respondent.
4. The application was filed with a supporting affidavit sworn by James K. Njenga on 26th March 2021 which amplifies the grounds of the application.
5. The application is opposed through a replying affidavit sworn on 20th April 2021 by Nyamao Erickson John the respondent, in which it is deponed that the applicant has not satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution of judgment or decree, and has failed to demonstrate substantial loss that they stand to suffer if stay orders are not granted.
6. The application was canvassed through filing of written submissions. In this regard, I have perused and considered the written submissions filed by Kimondo Gachoka & company for the appellant/applicant and the submissions filed by Waiganjo Wachira & co for the respondent. I note that both counsel for the parties relied on decided court case authorities.
7. This being an application for stay of execution of judgment or decree, it is governed by the provisions of Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. I note that though section 79(G) of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap. 21) was cited, there is no prayer for leave to appeal out of time.
8. The considerations for a court in determining an application for stay of execution of judgment or decree are -a)Whether the application has been made without unreasonable delay.b)Whether substantial loss may result to the applicant if stay orders are not granted.c)Whether the applicant has provided or offered to provide security for court orders that might ultimately be binding on him.
9. This is a money decree and from the facts disclosed to me in the application, the financial means of the respondent are not known. I thus find that there is possibility of substantial loss to be suffered by the applicants if the amount paid to the respondent is not recovered ultimately if this appeal on quantum succeeds.
10. With regard to delay in filing the application, I note that the application was filed during the period of the Covid-19 pandemic anxiety. In the circumstances of this matter, I do not see any unreasonable delay in filing the application.
11. With regard to provision of security, though I will grant stay of execution, I will order the appellant to pay part of the decretal amount as the appeal herein is only on quantum of damages. Such order for part payment, in my view satisfies the requirement for provision of security by the applicant. I am not persuaded by the applicant’s proposal for provision of a Bank guarantee.
12. Consequently, I order as follows:-1)Stay of execution of judgment or decree is granted pending determination of appeal.2)The above stay of execution is subject to the appellant/applicant paying the respondent through counsel part of the decretal amount Kshs.80,000/= within 60 days from today.3)In default of (2) above, the stay of execution orders granted herein will automatically lapse.4)The costs of the application will follow the decision in the appeal.
DELIVERED, SIGNED & DATED THIS 12THDAY OF MAY, 2022, IN OPEN COURT AT MAKUENI.………………………………….George DuluJudge