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

Wangatho v Gacheche (Environment and Land Appeal 19 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 238 (KLR) (30 January 2025) (Ruling)

[2025] KEELC 238 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
238
Citation
[2025] KEELC 238 (KLR)
Decided
30 January 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppellant seeks a stay of execution of the judgment of the Nyeri Business Premises Rent TribunalCoramJO OLOLA
Holding

The court grants an order of stay of execution of the judgment pending the hearing of the appeal.

Facts

The Appellant, Charles Githemo Wangatho, runs a hotel and butchery business on Plot No. Karatina Town Block 1/145, which the Respondent, Marc Timothy Gacheche, seeks to evict. The Appellant claims substantial loss if the eviction order is not stayed.

Issues

  1. Whether the Appellant's appeal has good chances of success
  2. Whether the Appellant will suffer substantial loss if the eviction order is not stayed
  3. Whether the Appellant has tendered evidence of substantial loss
  4. Whether the Appellant has offered security for the due performance of the decree

Reasoning

The court considers the application for a stay of execution and finds that the Appellant has not tendered evidence of substantial loss and has not offered security for the due performance of the decree. However, the court grants the stay to preserve the subject matter in dispute.

Outcome

Order of stay of execution granted

Orders

  • Order of stay of execution of the judgment pending the hearing of the appeal

Remedies

  • Order of stay of execution of the judgment pending the hearing of the appeal

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010
  • Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Cases cited (2)
  • RWW –Vs- EKW (2019) eKLR
  • Butt –Vs- Rent Restriction Tribunal (1982) KLR 417
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