[2018] KEHC 976 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 976 (KLR)

The court found that the deposit of Kshs. 7,882,793.00 was made solely as a condition for stay of execution pending appeal. Both parties acknowledged that the appeal had been determined and the appellate court did not order continued detention of the deposit. The court held that the purpose for which the deposit was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 976 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Oriental Construction Company Limited; Defendant: Rift Valley Services Water Board
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 161 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Release of Deposit
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
RB Ngetich
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Release of Security, Appeal Procedure, Deposit in Joint Account
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Stay of Execution Release of Security Appeal Procedure Deposit in Joint Account

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oriental Construction Company Limited

Plaintiff

Rift Valley Services Water Board

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Release of Deposit

  1. 1 Whether the sum of Kshs. 7,882,793.00 deposited as a condition for stay of execution should be released to the defendant's advocates after determination of the appeal.
  2. 2 Whether there is justification for continued retention of the deposit after the appeal has been determined.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the deposit of Kshs. 7,882,793.00 was made solely as a condition for stay of execution pending appeal. Both parties acknowledged that the appeal had been determined and the appellate court did not order continued detention of the deposit. The court held that the purpose for which the deposit was made had been fulfilled, and there was no legal justification for further retention of the funds. The plaintiff's argument for continued retention was rejected as no further application had been made for the deposit to be held pending determination of the substantive claim. Accordingly, the court ordered the release of the deposit and accrued interest to the defendant's...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Kshs. 7,882,793.00 plus interest in Account No. 015255XXXXXXXX in the name Odhiambo and Odhiambo & Wanjama & Company Advocates, Standard Chartered Bank Nakuru Branch be released to the defendant's advocates.
  • Costs in the cause.