[2001] KECA 15 (KLR)
The court held that the mere allegation of disobedience of a stay order does not, in itself, render an application urgent. The applicant's counsel is expected to pursue appropriate remedies for enforcement of court orders rather than seeking urgency certification. The court found no sufficient reason to certify the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2001] KECA 15 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Titus Kiragu; Respondent: Agricultural Development Corporation
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application 354 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application for Leave to Extend Time to File and Serve Record of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for urgency certification refused.
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Urgency Certification, Stay of Execution
- 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
Titus Kiragu
Applicant
Agricultural Development Corporation
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Leave to Extend Time to File and Serve Record of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for extension of time to file and serve the record of appeal should be certified as urgent.
- 2 Whether alleged disobedience of a stay order justifies urgency certification.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the mere allegation of disobedience of a stay order does not, in itself, render an application urgent. The applicant's counsel is expected to pursue appropriate remedies for enforcement of court orders rather than seeking urgency certification. The court found no sufficient reason to certify the application as urgent and declined to do so.
Court Disposition
Application for urgency certification refused.
Orders
- The application to certify the matter as urgent is refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
CORAM: OMOLO, J.A.
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 354 OF 2001 (189/01 UR)
TITUS KIRAGU .........................................................................APPLICANT
AND
AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION………….RESPONDENT
(An application for leave to extend time to file and serve the record of appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nakuru (Rimita J) dated 22nd September, 2000
in
NKR. H.C.C.C. NO. 111 OF 1999
*******************
R U L I N G
I do not think any of the matters being raised by counsel for the applicant can ever make the matter urgent. The judgment was given on 22nd September, 2000 and counsel tells me they have an order staying that judgment. If the stay order is being disobeyed as counsel alleges the answer to that is not to declare the matter urgent. Counsel knows or ought to know what to do if an order in their favour is being disregarded. I still see no reason to certify the matter as urgent and I refuse to do so.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 19th day of October, 2001.
R. S. C. OMOLO
---------------
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR