[2017] KEHC 1228 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 1228 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had satisfactorily explained the delay of approximately 60 days in filing the appeal. The supporting affidavit provided plausible reasons for the delay, and the respondent did not allege any serious prejudice that would result from granting the orders. The court emphasized the need...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEHC 1228 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Vivid Printing Equipment Solutions Limited; Respondent: Monicah Ngongoo t/a Identity Partner
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 242 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Stay of Execution
Outcome
Application allowed with conditions.
Judges
A Mbogholi-Msagha
Legal Topics
Extension of Time to Appeal, Stay of Execution, Commercial Judgment Enforcement
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Extension of Time to Appeal Stay of Execution Commercial Judgment Enforcement

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vivid Printing Equipment Solutions Limited

Appellant

Monicah Ngongoo t/a Identity Partner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient reason for the delay in filing the appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether a stay of execution of the lower court judgment should be granted pending appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had satisfactorily explained the delay of approximately 60 days in filing the appeal. The supporting affidavit provided plausible reasons for the delay, and the respondent did not allege any serious prejudice that would result from granting the orders. The court emphasized the need to balance the applicant's right of appeal with the respondent's right to the fruits of judgment. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to allow the applicant to file the appeal out of time and granted a stay of execution on condition that the entire decretal sum be deposited in an interest-earning account in the names of both advocates within 14 days. Failure to...

Court Disposition

Application allowed with conditions.

Orders

  • The applicant is allowed to file the appeal out of time.
  • The memorandum of appeal shall be filed within fourteen (14) days from the date of the ruling.