[2019] KEHC 11162 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 11162 (KLR)

The court found that the application for stay of execution was made without unreasonable delay, as it was filed within a week of the lower court's judgment. The applicant expressed a reasonable fear that the respondent may not be able to refund the decretal sum if the appeal succeeds, and the respondent did not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 11162 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Robert Waweru Maina t/a Auntique Auctions Limited; Respondent: Hussein Pothiwalla
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 267 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Stay Application
Outcome
Stay of execution granted on condition of deposit of decretal sum.
Judges
BT Jaden
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Due Performance, Substantial Loss, Appeal Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Security for Due Performance Substantial Loss Appeal 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Waweru Maina t/a Auntique Auctions Limited

Applicant

Hussein Pothiwalla

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Stay Application

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal under Order 42 rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant will suffer substantial loss if stay is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's ability to refund the decretal sum has been sufficiently challenged.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for stay of execution was made without unreasonable delay, as it was filed within a week of the lower court's judgment. The applicant expressed a reasonable fear that the respondent may not be able to refund the decretal sum if the appeal succeeds, and the respondent did not provide evidence to dispel this concern. Applying the principle that the evidential burden shifts to the respondent in such circumstances, the court determined that the applicant had satisfied the requirements for stay of execution under Order 42 rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. To balance the interests of both parties, the court granted a conditional stay of execution...

Court Disposition

Stay of execution granted on condition of deposit of decretal sum.

Orders

  • Stay of execution of the judgment/decree in CMCC No.5019 of 2013 Milimani Commercial Courts is granted pending appeal, on condition that the applicant deposits the decretal sum in an interest earning bank account of the counsels for the parties or in court within 30 days from the date hereof.