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

Sigei v Jackson (Civil Application E072 of 2022) [2023] KECA 480 (KLR) (12 May 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KECA 480 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
480
Citation
[2023] KECA 480 (KLR)
Decided
12 May 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil ApplicationPostureApplication for stay of execution of the ruling and the subsequent orders of the Environment and Land CourtCoramF. SICHALE, L. ACHODE, W. KORIR
Holding

The application is allowed, and an order of stay is issued effectively staying the execution of the orders of the Environment and Land Court pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal.

Facts

The applicant, Julius Sigei, claims to have been in possession of 94 acres of the suit land since 1996 and has been utilizing it as a source of his livelihood. The respondent, Tanyaang Shinanai Jackson, disputes this claim. The applicant seeks a stay of execution of the orders issued by the Environment and Land Court.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant's intended appeal is arguable and will be rendered nugatory if the stay is not granted.
  2. Whether the respondent will suffer prejudice if the stay is granted.

Reasoning

The court finds that the applicant's intended appeal is arguable and that the status quo should be maintained to avoid prejudice to either party.

Outcome

The application is granted.

Orders

  • An order of stay is issued effectively staying the execution of the orders of the Environment and Land Court at Narok in ELC Case No. 021 of 2021 pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal.

Remedies

  • The costs of this application shall abide the outcome of the intended appeal.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (3)
  • Chris Munga N. vs. Richard Nyagaka Tongi & 2 Others [2013] eKLR
  • Josephine Mueni Kiluta vs. Florence Ngina Kimeu [2021] eKLR
  • Stanley Kangethe Kinyanjui (supra)
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