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

Tom Mboya Odhiambo v Sarman Group Co Ltd [2021] KEELC 935 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 935 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
935
Citation
[2021] KEELC 935 (KLR)
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

TypeAppealPostureApplicant seeks stay of execution of ex parte decree pending appealCoramG M A Ongondo
The application is meritorious and the stay order is granted pending the hearing and determination of the appeal

Facts

Ex parte judgment was entered against the applicant on 18th November 2020, and an eviction notice was issued. The applicant seeks a stay of execution until the appeal is heard.

Issues

  • whether the decree sought to be stayed is a negative order capable of stay
  • whether the applicant has proved the conditions set for grant of orders

Reasoning

The court finds that there are special circumstances to make an order staying execution, and the applicant has an undoubted right of appeal.

Outcome

The application is granted

Orders

  • The stay order sought in the application dated 9th April 2021 and filed in court on 12th April 2021 be and is hereby granted pending the hearing and determination of the present appeal
  • Costs of the application be the costs in the appeal

Remedies

  • Stay of execution of the ex parte decree pending the hearing and determination of the appeal

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010
  • Land Registration Act 2016
Cases cited (5)
  • Gatu-vs-Muriuki (1986) KLR 211
  • James Kanyiita Nderitu and another-vs-Marios Philotas Ghikas and another (2016) eKLR
  • Onyango Oloo-vs-Attorney General (1986-89) EA 456
  • Butt –vs-Rent Restriction Tribunal (1979) eKLR
  • Wilson –vs- Church (No. 2) 12 Ch D (1879) 454 at p 459
⚠ 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