[2021] KEELC 105 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 105 (KLR)

The court found that the application for a temporary injunction was made promptly following the impugned judgment, satisfying the requirement of absence of unreasonable delay. The applicant demonstrated willingness to provide security for costs, which the court considered a mark of good faith and compliance with the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELC 105 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: William Kagotho Gachuri; Respondent: Julius Kanyuku Wanjau; Respondent: Bishar Ali Mohamed; Respondent: Nairobi City County
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case E028 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Temporary Injunction Pending Appeal
Outcome
application allowed with conditions
Judges
LC Komingoi
Legal Topics
Temporary Injunctions, Stay of Execution, Security for Costs, Irreparable Harm, Appeals Process
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Temporary Injunctions Stay of Execution Security for Costs Irreparable Harm Appeals Process

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Kagotho Gachuri

Appellant

Julius Kanyuku Wanjau

Respondent

Bishar Ali Mohamed

Respondent

Nairobi City County

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Temporary Injunction Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with Plot NO 163/1 Komarock Bridge Jua Kali pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the application for stay of execution was made without unreasonable delay.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has demonstrated willingness to provide security for due performance of the decree.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for a temporary injunction was made promptly following the impugned judgment, satisfying the requirement of absence of unreasonable delay. The applicant demonstrated willingness to provide security for costs, which the court considered a mark of good faith and compliance with the requirements for stay of execution and injunction pending appeal. The court was satisfied that the applicant would suffer irreparable loss if the property was disposed of before the appeal was heard and determined. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to grant a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the suit property, conditional...

Court Disposition

application allowed with conditions

Orders

  • A temporary injunction is issued restraining the 1st and 2nd Respondents, their agents, employees, or anyone acting on their behalf from selling, transferring, auctioning, disposing of, or otherwise interfering with Plot NO 163/1 Komarock Bridge Jua Kali pending the hearing and determination of the appeal, on...
  • The costs of this application shall abide the outcome of the appeal.