[2023] KEHC 949 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 949 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal as set out in Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The application was made within 30 days of the judgment, indicating no inordinate delay. The applicant demonstrated willingness and had already...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 949 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Susan Nyambura; Respondent: Francis Nguru Gichia
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kiambu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal E173 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for stay of execution pending appeal allowed.
Judges
RB Ngetich
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Costs, Substantial Loss, Appeals From Small Claims, Decretal Amount, Abuse of Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Stay of Execution Security for Costs Substantial Loss Appeals From Small Claims Decretal Amount Abuse of 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Susan Nyambura

Appellant

Francis Nguru Gichia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has met the prerequisites for grant of stay of execution pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant will suffer substantial loss if stay is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the application is an abuse of the court process for failure to seek stay in the lower court or leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal as set out in Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The application was made within 30 days of the judgment, indicating no inordinate delay. The applicant demonstrated willingness and had already deposited the decretal amount as security in court. There was no clear evidence that the respondent would be able to refund the decretal sum if the appeal succeeded, thus exposing the applicant to substantial loss. The court held that the appeal should not be rendered nugatory and therefore allowed the application for stay of execution, ordering that the decretal amount remain...

Court Disposition

Application for stay of execution pending appeal allowed.

Orders

  • Stay of execution of the decree in Thika SCC.Com Case no. E169 of 2022 granted on condition that the decretal amount deposited in court remains until hearing and determination of the appeal.
  • Costs of the application to abide by the outcome of the appeal.