Nelson Kanyora Kariuki & Another v Njoroge Kariuki
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal refused to stay High Court orders, doubting that interlocutory rulings made in a pending appeal can be appealed at all.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicants should be granted a stay of execution of the High Court's interlocutory orders pending an intended appeal
- 2.Whether there is a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal against interlocutory orders made in an appeal pending before the High Court
Key legal issues
#Whether a stay of execution should be granted of interlocutory orders made by the High Court in a pending appeal, where the intended appeal to the Court of Appeal is itself of doubtful competency
The application was dismissed; the Court doubted the existence of a right of appeal against such interlocutory orders and saw no reason to grant a stay.
The High Court had made interlocutory orders within an appeal pending before it. The applicants sought a stay of those orders, which the judge refused. The applicants then sought a stay from the Court of Appeal on the basis of an intended appeal against the refusal. The Court expressed serious doubt that any right of appeal lay against interlocutory orders made in an appeal pending before the High Court, and, finding no reason to grant the application, dismissed it with costs to the respondent.
Legal principles established
#- The Court of Appeal expressed doubt that interlocutory orders made in an appeal pending before the High Court are appealable to the Court of Appeal, and refused a stay premised on such an intended appeal.
Court orders
#- 1.The application for stay of execution is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondent
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- H.C.C.A. No. 27 of 1996
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Application for stay of execution of High Court orders; the Court doubted any right of appeal lay against the interlocutory orders in question
Relief refused
#Stay of execution of the High Court's interlocutory orders
The Court saw no reason to grant the application and doubted whether an appeal lay against the interlocutory orders
Costs
Dismissed with costs to the respondent
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
We doubt very much whether there is a right to appeal to this Court against interlocutory orders made in an appeal pending before the High Court.
We see no reason to grant this application and that being so, we dismiss it with costs to the respondent.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nelson Kanyora Kariuki & Another v Njoroge Kariuki", Case Analysis (1996). Civil Application No. Nai 113 of 1996 (42/96 UR). Source:
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.