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

GABRIEL NGUNYANGI t/a REVIVAL AGENCIES v WILLIAM MITI MICHUGU [2009] KEHC 646 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 646 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
646
Citation
[2009] KEHC 646 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppellant seeks stay of execution of a ruling pending appeal.CoramH. M. OKWENGU
Holding

The court grants the application for stay of execution on certain terms.

Facts

Appellant Gabriel Ngunyangi t/a Revival Agencies filed an appeal against a ruling in Civil Case No. 150 of 2009. The respondent William Miti Michugu is seeking execution of the decree.

Issues

  1. Whether the appellant has shown substantial loss that he will suffer.
  2. Whether the application for stay of execution should be granted.

Reasoning

The court considers the application and notes that the appellant has deposited KShs.100,000 and provided a bank guarantee for KShs.150,000. The court finds that the application is appropriate and grants the stay of execution.

Outcome

The court grants the application for stay of execution.

Orders

  • The sum of Kshs.100,000 deposited by the appellant shall be released to the parties' counsel to be deposited into an interest earning account with a reputable financial institution in the joint names of the parties' advocates within 21 days from the date hereof.
  • The appellant shall provide a bank guarantee for a sum of Kshs.150,000 to remain in force for the next 12 months within 21 days from today.
  • The appellant shall file and serve a record of appeal within 90 days from the date hereof.
  • If the appellant fails to comply with condition No. (ii) or (iii) above, or the appeal is not disposed of within 12 months from the date hereof, the order for stay of execution shall be discharged unless otherwise extended by the Court.

Remedies

  • Stay of execution pending appeal.
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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case