[2021] KEHC 8945 (KLR)
The court found that the applicants had demonstrated willingness to abide by conditions for stay, including posting security, and that this was sufficient to exercise discretion in their favour. The right of appeal must be balanced against the respondents' right to enjoy the fruits of their judgment. The court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 8945 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Wilfred Kanuni Sagwe; Applicant: Ronald Nyaboga Nyambasora; Respondent: Agnes Ngina Kioko & Nicholas Manthi Kioko (suing as the admin of the estate of Stephen Kioko Nguli)
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 214 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Extension of Time to Appeal
- Outcome
- application allowed with conditions
- Judges
- A Mbogholi-Msagha
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Extension of Time, Appeals Out of Time, Security for Decretal Sum
- 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
Wilfred Kanuni Sagwe
Applicant
Ronald Nyaboga Nyambasora
Applicant
Agnes Ngina Kioko & Nicholas Manthi Kioko (suing as the admin of the estate of Stephen Kioko Nguli)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Extension of Time to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time to file an appeal out of time.
- 2 Whether a stay of execution of the lower court judgment should be granted pending appeal.
- 3 What conditions, if any, should be imposed for the grant of stay of execution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants had demonstrated willingness to abide by conditions for stay, including posting security, and that this was sufficient to exercise discretion in their favour. The right of appeal must be balanced against the respondents' right to enjoy the fruits of their judgment. The court therefore allowed the application for stay of execution and extension of time to appeal, on condition that the entire decretal sum is deposited in a joint interest earning account in the names of both advocates within 30 days. The memorandum of appeal must be filed within seven days, and the record of appeal within 30 days from the date of the ruling. Costs of the application were...
Court Disposition
application allowed with conditions
Orders
- Application allowed in terms of prayers 4, 5 and 6.
- Entire decretal sum to be deposited in a joint interest earning account in the names of both advocates within 30 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
AT NAIROBI
MISC APPLICATION NO. 214 OF 2020
WILFRED KANUNI SAGWE...............................................................................1ST APPLICANT
RONALD NYABOGA NYAMBASORA...............................................................2ND APPLICANT
VERSUS
AGNES NGINA KIOKO & NICHOLAS MANTHI KIOKO
(suing as the admin of the estateof STEPHEN KIOKO NGULI)......................RESPONDENTS
RULING
There is a judgment in favour of the respondents against the applicants in the lower court dated 8th November, 2019. The applicants were aggrieved by the said judgment but did not file the appeal in time. There is now before me an application filed on 19th June, 2020 under Sections 1A, 1B, 3A, 63 (e) 79G and 95 of the Civil Procedure Act, Order 6 rule 6 and Order 51 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, seeking a stay of execution of the lower court judgment, extension of time to file the appeal out of time and also to extend time within which to serve the Memorandum of Appeal and Record of Appeal.
There is also another prayer to stay the declaratory suit filed in the lower court against Monarch Insurance Company Limited to enforce the judgment of the lower court. The application is supported by grounds set out and the supporting affidavit of the advocate for the applicants. The application is opposed and there is a replying affidavit sworn by the 2nd respondent.
I have gone through the submissions filed by both parties. In what has become a standard requirement, once it is demonstrated substantial loss may be incurred if stay is not granted, the orders sought should be given. The applicants have stated they are ready to abide by any conditions set by the court.
The respondents on the other hand have stated in the replying affidavit at paragraph 10 thereof that in the event the application is allowed then the applicants should be ordered to deposit the entire decretal sum set out in a joint account as security.
I recognize the fact the applicants have the right of appeal while the respondents have a judgment in their favour which they are keen to execute. I know the adverse consequences of staying a suit which ordinarily compromises expeditious disposal of litigation. However, in the instant case the applicants have offered to post security which in my view is sufficient to tilt the courts discretion in their favour.
In balancing the interests of the parties herein, I shall allow the application on condition that the entire decretal sum is deposited in a joint interest earning account in the names of both advocates appearing for the parties. This shall be complied with within 30 days from the date of this ruling. The respondents however shall have the costs of this application.
For avoidance of any doubt, the application is allowed in terms of prayers 4, 5 and 6. The memorandum of appeal shall be filed within seven days of this order while the record of appeal shall be filed within 30 days from the date of this ruling.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 25th day of February, 2021.
A.MBOGHOLI MSAGHA
JUDGE