[2024] KEELC 1304 (KLR)

[2024] KEELC 1304 (KLR)

The court found that the application for stay of execution was filed timeously and that the appellants had demonstrated merit in their request, particularly as they had already deposited the sum of Kshs. 600,000 as security for costs as previously directed by the court. The absence of opposition from the respondents...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEELC 1304 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Guyo Huka Roba; Appellant: Tadesa Mohamed; Appellant: Roba Arero; Respondent: Sora Guyo Huka; Respondent: Guyo Okola Haro; Respondent: Michael Malicha Guyo
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Isiolo
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal E002 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed with conditions.
Judges
PM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Costs, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
en
Land and Property Stay of Execution Security for Costs Appeal Procedure

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

Guyo Huka Roba

Appellant

Tadesa Mohamed

Appellant

Roba Arero

Appellant

Sora Guyo Huka

Respondent

Guyo Okola Haro

Respondent

Michael Malicha Guyo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the appellants are entitled to a stay of execution of the judgment pending determination of the appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the deposit of Kshs. 600,000 as security for costs is sufficient to warrant the grant of stay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for stay of execution was filed timeously and that the appellants had demonstrated merit in their request, particularly as they had already deposited the sum of Kshs. 600,000 as security for costs as previously directed by the court. The absence of opposition from the respondents further supported the grant of the orders sought. The court exercised its discretion to allow the application, ordering that the deposited sum remain in court custody until the appeal is determined, and directed the appellants to file and exchange the record of appeal within 21 days. The costs of the application were ordered to be in the cause.

Court Disposition

Application allowed with conditions.

Orders

  • The application for stay of execution is allowed; costs shall be in the cause.
  • The sum of Kshs. 600,000 deposited as security for costs shall remain in the custody of the court until the appeal is heard and determined.