SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Henry Wanyama Khaemba v Standard Chartered Bank (K) Limited [2008] KECA 153 (KLR)

[2008] KECA 153 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
153
Citation
[2008] KECA 153 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureApplication for injunction and stay of execution in an intended appealCoramE. M. Githinji, P. N. Wakii, J. Aluocho
Holding

The court granted the application for an injunction and stay of execution.

Facts

The applicant, Henry Wanyama Khaemba, sought an injunction and stay of execution in an intended appeal against a ruling and order of Mr. Justice Warsame in HCCC No. 560 of 2006 Nairobi, Milimani.

Issues

  1. Whether the application for injunction and stay of execution is urgent.
  2. Whether the intended appeal is arguable.
  3. Whether the intended appeal will be rendered nugatory without an injunction and stay.
  4. Whether the applicant is ready and willing to comply with any terms of grant of stay or an injunction including depositing any contested amount in court.

Reasoning

The court found the application urgent and the intended appeal arguable, thus granting the injunction and stay.

Outcome

Granted

Orders

  • Certified the application as urgent.
  • Issued a temporary injunction restraining the respondent from auctioning, alienating, disposing off or interfering with the applicant's ownership and possession of L.R. No. 209/3890 I.R 32478 Nairobi.
  • Stayed the execution of the order for costs awarded against the applicant in HCCC No. 560 of 2006 Nairobi, Milimani.
  • Ordered the intended appeal to be heard as a matter of urgency upon filing the record of appeal.

Remedies

  • Injunction and stay of execution.
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case