Francis Kabaa v Nancy Wambui Jane Wanjiru
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal refused a stay of execution, confirming that stays cannot be granted against orders to pay costs and applicants must give strong reasons.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether stay of execution can issue in respect of a costs order
The court held that stay cannot be granted in respect of costs, since a successful appellant would be refunded his costs in any event.
The applicant sought a stay of an order that he pay costs, but the court observed that this misconstrued the order of Amin, J., which had dismissed the suit. Even if the order were one for costs, an appellant who succeeds on appeal would be refunded his costs, so no prejudice would arise. The court therefore concluded that stay is not available in respect of costs and that the applicant had given no cogent reason warranting the discretionary relief.
Whether the applicant had demonstrated grounds for a stay pending an intended appeal
The application was refused because the applicant failed to give any cogent reason why stay should be granted.
Stay of execution is a discretionary remedy that an applicant must justify on cogent grounds. The court found the applicant's characterization of the order below inaccurate and his justification for the relief wanting. In the absence of a cogent reason, the court declined to exercise its discretion in his favour, refused the application, and ordered the applicant to pay the costs of the application.
Legal principles established
#- A stay of execution cannot be granted in respect of an order to pay costs.
Court orders
#- 1.The application for stay of execution is refused
- 2.The applicant to pay the costs of the application
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- H.C.C.C. No. 206 of 1994
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Application for stay of execution in an intended appeal to the Court of Appeal (rule-based jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over intended appeals; specific rule not stated in the judgment)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (2)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Gichuki (Suing as one of the administrators of the Estate of Jairus Gichuki Peter) v Gichuki & 4 others (Land Case E250 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 5268 (KLR)[2026] KEELC 5268 (KLR)12 Aug 2026applied
- Maboko Distributors Ltd & 2 others v Njahira (Environment and Land Appeal E073 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 993 (KLR)[2026] KEELC 993 (KLR)20 Feb 2026
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Francis Kabaa v Nancy Wambui Jane Wanjiru", Case Analysis (1996). Civil Application No. NAI 298 of 1996 (113/96 UR). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1996/1/eng@1996-12-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.