[2020] KEHC 10201 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 10201 (KLR)

The court found that the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence regarding its financial position, the nature of its business, or to offer any form of security for the stay of execution. The affidavit in support of the application was deemed threadbare and insufficient to justify the exercise of the court's...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 10201 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Subru Motors Limited; Respondent: Commissioner of Domestic Taxes
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tax Appeal E074 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
DAS Majanja
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Appeal, Tax Assessment Dispute, Burden of Proof on Applicant
Source Language
en
Tax Law Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Security for Appeal Tax Assessment Dispute Burden of Proof on Applicant

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

Subru Motors Limited

Appellant

Commissioner of Domestic Taxes

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to an order of stay of execution pending appeal against the Tax Appeal Tribunal's decision.
  2. 2 What terms, if any, should be imposed for the grant of stay, particularly regarding security.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant has demonstrated sufficient grounds for the exercise of the court's discretion to grant stay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence regarding its financial position, the nature of its business, or to offer any form of security for the stay of execution. The affidavit in support of the application was deemed threadbare and insufficient to justify the exercise of the court's discretion in favour of granting a stay. The court emphasized that the burden lies on the applicant to demonstrate, with evidence, the risk of substantial loss and to propose reasonable security. In the absence of such evidence and proposals, the court could not fashion an appropriate order for stay. Consequently, the application for stay of execution was dismissed with costs...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 18th September 2020 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.