[2025] KEHC 7211 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 7211 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, namely the late provision of typed proceedings, and that the delay of approximately one and a half months was not inordinate given the circumstances at the court station. The court further held that the application for stay was made without undue delay, that the applicant would suffer substantial loss if execution proceeded before the appeal was heard, and that the offer to deposit half of the decretal sum as security in a joint interest-earning account was fair and sufficient. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to grant leave to appeal out of time and to stay...

Citation
[2025] KEHC 7211 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Janet Abisi Simon; Respondent: Sospeter Nyatuka Oira
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisii
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
8 April 2025
Case Number
Civil Appeal 215 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay and Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
Application allowed.
Judges
TA Odera
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Stay of Execution, Extension of Time, Substantial Loss, Security for Due Performance
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Out of Time Stay of Execution Extension of Time Substantial Loss Security for Due Performance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janet Abisi Simon

Appellant

Sospeter Nyatuka Oira

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay and Leave to Appeal Out of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has met the conditions for leave to appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, namely the late provision of typed proceedings, and that the delay of approximately one and a half months was not inordinate given the circumstances at the court station. The court further held that the application for stay was made without undue delay, that the applicant would suffer substantial loss if execution proceeded before the appeal was heard, and that the offer to deposit half of the decretal sum as security in a joint interest-earning account was fair and sufficient. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to grant leave to appeal out of time and to stay...

Court Disposition

Application allowed.

Orders

  • Leave to file appeal out of time is granted; intended appeal to be filed and served within 14 days.
  • Stay of execution of the judgment in MCCC No 612 of 2021 is granted pending appeal, on condition that the applicant deposits half of the decretal sum in a joint interest earning account in the names of both advocates within 45 days.