[2020] KECA 372 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal found that the applicants had demonstrated that their intended appeal was arguable and not frivolous. Furthermore, the Court held that if stay of execution was not granted, the property in question could be transferred to third parties, thereby rendering the intended appeal nugatory if it...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KECA 372 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Susan Njeri Njoroge; Applicant: Peter Muchiri; Respondent: Geoffrey Thiong’o Kamau
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application 56 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for stay of execution allowed; judgment of the Environment and Land Court stayed pending appeal.
- Judges
- A Mohammed, S ole Kantai
- Legal Topics
- Adverse Possession, Stay of Execution, Registration of Land, Appeal Procedure
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Susan Njeri Njoroge
Applicant
Peter Muchiri
Applicant
Geoffrey Thiong’o Kamau
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants have satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the intended appeal is arguable and not frivolous.
- 3 Whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory if stay is not granted.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal found that the applicants had demonstrated that their intended appeal was arguable and not frivolous. Furthermore, the Court held that if stay of execution was not granted, the property in question could be transferred to third parties, thereby rendering the intended appeal nugatory if it succeeded. The Court exercised its discretion under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules to grant a stay of execution of the judgment of the Environment and Land Court pending the hearing and determination of the appeal. The costs of the application were ordered to abide the outcome of the appeal.
Court Disposition
Application for stay of execution allowed; judgment of the Environment and Land Court stayed pending appeal.
Orders
- Stay of execution of the judgment of the Environment and Land Court in ELC Case No. 154 of 2010 (O.S) granted pending hearing and determination of the appeal.
- Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
37 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
(CORAM: GATEMBU, J. MOHAMMED & KANTAI, JJ.A)
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 56 OF 2020
BETWEEN
SUSAN NJERI NJOROGE and
PETER MUCHIRI as personal representatives of the Estate of
FRANCIS NJOROGE MWANIKI (Deceased)...................................................APPLICANTS
AND
GEOFFREY THIONG’O KAMAU...................................................................RESPONDENT
(Being an application for stay of execution of decree pending the hearing and
determination of the appeal against the judgment of the Environment and Land Court
at Nairobi (Bor, J.) delivered on 9thDecember 2018inELC Civil Case No. 154 of 2010 (OS)
***************************************
RULING OF THE COURT
1. The applicants by their application dated 26th January 2020 seek an order of stay of execution of the judgment of the Environment and Land Court (Bor, J.) given on 6th December 2018 in ELC Case No. 154 of 2010. By that judgment, the Environment and Land Court (ELC) decreed that the respondent is entitled to be registered as the proprietor of an acre out of the property known as Loc. 16/Ndonyo Chege 305. The applicants were directed by the court to execute a transfer to convey the same to the respondent and in default the Deputy Registrar of the ELC was authorized to sign all necessary documents on behalf the applicants.
2. In the supporting affidavit, Peter Muchiri Njoroge deposes that the suit property is ancestral land; that in granting judgment in favour of the respondent, the ELC failed to have regard to legal principles on adverse possession; and that the applicants are apprehensive that once the property is transferred to the respondent as ordered by the ELC, the respondent could transfer it to third parties thereby rendering the intended appeal nugatory.
3. In his replying affidavit sworn on 7th April 2020, the respondent states that the judgment was delivered in 2018 and the applicants are guilty of inordinate delay; that the grounds of appeal are very weak and baseless and have low possibility of success; that the apprehension that he will transfer the property to third parties is misplaced and is based on mere speculation.
4. We have considered the application, the affidavits and the submissions by Macharia Waiganjo & Nyakoe advocates and by Kimandu & Ndegwa Company Advocates for the applicants and respondent respectively. In an application of this nature, the applicant is required to demonstrate that the intended appeal is arguable and that if we decline to grant the orders sought, the intended appeal, if successful, will be rendered nugatory. As stated by the Court in Ishmael Kagunyi Thande vs. Housing Finance Company of Kenya Limited, Civil Application No.157 of 2006 [2007]eKLR:
“The jurisdiction of the Court under rule 5(2)(b) is not only original but also discretionary. Two principles guide the Court in the exercise of that jurisdiction. These principles are now well settled. For an applicant to succeed he must not only show his appeal or intended appeal is arguable, but also that unless the court grants him an injunction or stay as the case may be, the success of that appeal will be rendered nugatory.”
5. As to arguability of the intended appeal, we bear in mind that an arguable appeal is not one that must necessarily succeed. We are satisfied that the grounds of appeal in the intended appeal to which we have referred are not frivolous. The intended appeal is arguable.
6. On the second limb, we take the view that the intended appeal, if successful, will be rendered nugatory if we decline the orders sought as the property may be out of reach should it be disposed of in the meantime. We also note from the record of application that by an order made on 21st November 2019 and issued on 9th December 2019, the ELC granted the applicants an order of “stay of execution of obtaining orders of stay of execution in the court of appeal” for 60 days which have since lapsed.
7. The result is that we allow the application dated 26th January 2020 with the result that the judgment of the ELC given on 6th December 2018 in ELC Case No. 154 of 2010 (O.S) is hereby stayed pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.The costs of the application will abide the outcome of the appeal.
Orders accordingly.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 7thday of August, 2020.
S. GATEMBU KAIRU, (FCIArb)
....................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
JAMILA MOHAMMED
...................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
S. ole KANTAI
...................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
Signed
DEPUTY REGISTRAR