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

Mutiso & another v Ngoma (Civil Appeal E109 of 2021) [2021] KEHC 344 (KLR) (14 December 2021) (Ruling)

[2021] KEHC 344 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
344
Citation
[2021] KEHC 344 (KLR)
Decided
14 December 2021
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from a judgment in a civil caseCoramAg., However Odunga, MW MUIGAI, Mativo
Holding

The court granted a stay of execution pending the appeal and ordered the appellants to pay half the decretal sum to the respondent.

Facts

The appellants (Mutiso & Wamuba) sought a stay of execution of a judgment awarding damages to the respondent (Ngoma) in a civil case. The judgment apportioned 100% liability to the defendant and awarded damages to Ngoma.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should grant a stay of execution pending the appeal
  2. Whether the appellants provided sufficient security for the stay of execution

Reasoning

The court found that the appellants had a reasonable fear that the respondent would not be able to pay the decretal sum if the judgment was executed, and thus the court shifted the burden to the respondent to show her financial standing.

Outcome

Appeal granted, stay of execution granted

Orders

  • Stay of execution pending appeal
  • Appellants to pay half the decretal sum to the respondent

Remedies

  • Stay of execution
  • Payment of half the decretal sum

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Cases cited (5)
  • Tropical Commodities Suppliers Ltd and Others vs. International Credit Bank Limited (in liquidation) (2004) E.A. LR 331
  • Masisi Mwita vs. Damaris Wanjiku Njeri [2016] eKLR
  • Equity Bank Ltd vs. Taiga Adams Company Ltd, [2006] eKLR
  • Kenya Shell Limited vs. Kibiru [1986] KLR 410
  • National Industrial Credit Bank Ltd vs. Aquinas Francis Wasike & another [2006] eKLR
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