[2024] KEHC 8609 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant failed to adduce evidence of imminent execution or any ongoing proceedings in the concluded lower court case to justify urgency. As a result, the application was not certified as urgent. However, the court issued directions for service, filing of responses and submissions, and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 8609 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: William Ololo; Respondent: National Housing Corporation
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application E279 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Certification of Urgency and Directions
- Outcome
- Application not certified as urgent; directions issued for service, responses, and maintenance of status quo.
- Judges
- MS Shariff
- Legal Topics
- Certification of Urgency, Service of Process, Status Quo Orders
- 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
William Ololo
Applicant
National Housing Corporation
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Certification of Urgency and Directions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application demonstrates sufficient urgency to warrant certification as urgent.
- 2 Whether there is evidence of imminent execution or ongoing proceedings justifying urgent intervention.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant failed to adduce evidence of imminent execution or any ongoing proceedings in the concluded lower court case to justify urgency. As a result, the application was not certified as urgent. However, the court issued directions for service, filing of responses and submissions, and ordered that the status quo be maintained pending further mention. The court exercised its discretion to ensure procedural fairness and prevent prejudice while declining to grant urgent certification.
Court Disposition
Application not certified as urgent; directions issued for service, responses, and maintenance of status quo.
Orders
- This application is not certified as urgent.
- The application to be served within 2 days from the date hereof.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
Ololo v National Housing Corporation (Miscellaneous Application E279 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 8609 (KLR) (16 July 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 8609 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Miscellaneous Application E279 of 2024
MS Shariff, J
July 16, 2024
Between
William Ololo
Applicant
and
National Housing Corporation
Respondent
Ruling
1. Upon perusal of the Applicant’s chamber summons dated 12. 7.2024, the certificate of urgency issued by James Aggrey Mwamu esquire advocate on even date, the affidavit in support of the chamber summons sworn by William Ololo on even date and the annexures thereto, I do note that the impugned judgment was delivered on 22. 11. 2024. so far no evidence of risk of imminent execution has been adduced wherefore no urgency has been demonstrated.
2. Given case No. Kisumu CMCC 576/2019 was concluded, the Applicant has not adduced any evidence to show that the Respondent is undertaking further proceedings in that case.
3. Premised on the reasons aforestated I hereby make the following orders:-1. This application is not certified as urgent.2. The same be served within 2 days from the date hereof.3. The Respondent is directed to file its response within 10 days from the date hereof.4. The Applicant is granted leave to file and serve a supplementary affidavit, it need be simultaneously with his submissions within 18 days from the date hereof.5. The Respondent is directed to file its submissions within 26 days from the date hereof.6. Status quo be maintained.7. Mention on 24/9/2024 before High Court No. 1 to confirm compliance and take a ruling date.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED THIS 16THDAY OF JULY, 2024. M. S. SHARIFFJUDGE