Pepco Construction Co. Ltd v Carters & Sons Limited
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal paused enforcement of a Kshs 7.2m judgment, but only because the losing company agreed to deposit the money in a joint account.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicant satisfied the rule 5(2)(b) criteria of an arguable appeal and nugatory outcome
The court found the application very borderline but allowed it, granting a stay conditional on the applicant depositing the decretal sum of Kshs 7.2m in a joint interest-bearing account within 14 days, failing which the application would stand dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Counsel for the applicant argued the appeal was arguable because the judge allegedly awarded unpleaded and unproved special damages, and that recovery from the asset-less respondent would be slim if the appeal succeeded. Counsel for the respondent countered that the award was general damages for wrongful detention, not special damages. The court, balancing the age of the decree and the interests of both parties, granted a conditional stay rather than an unconditional one.
Legal principles established
#- On a rule 5(2)(b) stay application, the court may grant a stay on terms protecting both parties, such as conditional deposit of the decretal amount, where the application is borderline but the interests of justice require it.
Court orders
#- 1.Stay of execution of the decree granted on condition that the applicant deposits Kshs 7.2m in an interest-bearing account in the joint names of the Advocates for both parties at a bank to be agreed between them within 14 days
- 2.In default of the deposit, the application to stand dismissed with costs to the respondent
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- H.C.C.C. No. 5638 of 1989
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Pepco Construction Co. Ltd v Carters & Sons Limited", Case Analysis (1999). Civil Application No. NAI. 97 of 1999. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1999/51/eng@1999-10-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.