[2023] KEHC 3320 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 3320 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants had lodged a Notice of Appeal and made the application for stay without delay. The court was persuaded that the applicants were likely to suffer substantial loss if the stay was not granted, as the decretal sum could dissipate before the appeal is heard. The court held that the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 3320 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Bob Kephas Otieno; Applicant: Eveline Awino Ogutu t/a Nyangume Enterprise; Respondent: Ethics & Anti-Corruption Commission
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Civil Suit 4 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for stay of execution pending appeal allowed on condition of security for the decretal sum.
Judges
EN Maina
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Appeals Process, Security for Decree
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Stay of Execution Appeals Process Security for Decree

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bob Kephas Otieno

Applicant

Eveline Awino Ogutu t/a Nyangume Enterprise

Applicant

Ethics & Anti-Corruption Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants will suffer substantial loss if stay is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether security for due performance of the decree has been provided.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had lodged a Notice of Appeal and made the application for stay without delay. The court was persuaded that the applicants were likely to suffer substantial loss if the stay was not granted, as the decretal sum could dissipate before the appeal is heard. The court held that the issue of the appeal's merits is for the appellate court. The court further held that, in compliance with Rule 6(2)(b), an order for stay would only be granted on condition that the entire decretal sum is deposited in court or in an interest-earning joint account within thirty days. Costs of the application were awarded to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Application for stay of execution pending appeal allowed on condition of security for the decretal sum.

Orders

  • Stay of execution pending appeal is granted on condition that the entire decretal sum is deposited in court or in an interest-earning account in the joint names of counsel for the parties within thirty days.
  • Costs of the application shall be borne by the applicants.