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

Rahans Investments Limited v Amaranth Enterprised Limited; Kenya National Chamber of Commerce (Third Party) [2021] KEELC 547 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 547 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
547
Citation
[2021] KEELC 547 (KLR)
Decided
8 December 2021
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeCivilPostureApplication for stay of execution pending appealCoramN.A. MATHEKA
The application is dismissed with costs as the appeal is not arguable and the success of the appeal would not be rendered nugatory.

Facts

The defendant (Amaranth) had previously been granted an interlocutory mandatory injunction by Azangalala J. on 27 August 2009, restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's (Rahans) occupation of Mombasa/Block XXIII/185. The plaintiff (Rahans) has been in occupation of the suit property since January 2016. The plaintiff has filed a notice of appeal against the judgment.

Issues

  • Whether the application for stay of execution pending appeal is arguable.
  • Whether the success of the appeal, if successful, would be rendered nugatory by the refusal to grant the stay.

Reasoning

The court found that the appeal is not frivolous and the success of the appeal would not be rendered nugatory. The court also found that the plaintiff has not suffered substantial loss and has not provided security.

Outcome

Application dismissed with costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Act
  • Civil Procedure Rules
Cases cited (3)
  • Chris Munga N. Bichange vs Richard Nyagaka Tongi & 2 Others
  • Mohamed Salim T/A Choice Butchery vs Nasserpuria Memon Jamat
  • Carter & Sons Ltd vs Deposit Protection Fund Board & 2 Others
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case