Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealDismissedCivil Appli 47 of 2007· [2007] KECA 492 (KLR)

DAVID THIONG’O T/A WELCOME GENERAL STORES v DAVID THIONG’O T/A WELCOME GENERAL STORES [2007] KECA 492 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
30 March 2007
1,202 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal cannot use Rule 5(2)(b) to stay a magistrate's order — its stay power only covers the High Court decision being appealed.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an application under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules seeking stay of execution of a ruling of El Kindy, Ag. Senior Principal Magistrate, delivered on 15th November 2005, dismissing the applicant's application to set aside summary judgment in a landlord-tenant possession suit, pending an intended appeal against Visram J's High Court ruling of 28th February 2007 dismissing the applicant's application for stay before the High Court. The Court doubted sua sponte whether it had jurisdiction to stay execution of an order of a subordinate court which was the subject of an appeal pending in the superior court. Holding that the Court of Appeal Rules are made under the Appellate Jurisdiction Act (Cap 9) conferring jurisdiction to hear appeals from the High Court and matters incidental thereto, the Court reasoned that a Notice of Appeal under Rule 74 relates only to a decision of the superior court, and it is the lodging of such a Notice that confers jurisdiction to grant stay under Rule 5(2)(b). The stay power therefore extends only to the decision appealed from - here, Visram J's ruling - and not to the subordinate court's order. The Court followed its decision in Western College of Arts and Applied Sciences v Oranga & Others [1976] KLR 63. It further held, by parity of reasoning, that El Kindy's dismissal ordered no party to do or refrain from anything or pay any sum, so nothing was executable except costs. The application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Court of Appeal can stay execution of a subordinate court's order under Rule 5(2)(b) where the appeal before it is from a superior court decision.

Holding

The Court has no such jurisdiction; Rule 5(2)(b) stay power attaches only to the decision of the superior court which is the subject of the Notice of Appeal.

Reasoning

The Court of Appeal Rules are made under the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, which confers jurisdiction to hear appeals from the High Court and matters incidental thereto. Under Rule 74, a Notice of Appeal relates only to a decision of the superior court, and it is the lodging of the Notice of Appeal that confers jurisdiction to grant stay under Rule 5(2)(b). Therefore the stay can only relate to the decision appealed from, here Visram J's order, not the subordinate court's ruling of El Kindy.

p. 2
02

Whether, independently of jurisdiction, there was anything in the magistrate's dismissal of the application to set aside summary judgment capable of being stayed.

Holding

No; a dismissal orders no party to do or refrain from doing anything or to pay any sum, so there is nothing to execute except costs.

Reasoning

Applying by parity of reasoning the Western College decision, where the High Court has not ordered a party to do anything, refrain from anything, or pay any sum, there is nothing arising out of the judgment for the Court of Appeal on an application for stay to enforce or restrain by injunction. El Kindy merely dismissed the application to set aside the summary judgment, leaving only the order for payment of costs as executable.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The Court of Appeal's jurisdiction to grant a stay of execution under Rule 5(2)(b) is confined to the decision of the superior court that is the subject of the Notice of Appeal; it does not extend to staying orders of subordinate courts under appeal in the High Court.
  • A dismissal of an application to set aside a summary judgment is not capable of execution, since it orders no party to do or refrain from doing anything or to pay any sum, except as to costs.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application for stay of execution is dismissed with costs to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 5(2)(b)
  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 74(1)
  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 74(6)
  • Appellate Jurisdiction ActCap 9

Cases cited (1)

  • Western College of Arts and Applied Sciences vs. Oranga & Others
    [1976] KLR 63
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
H.C.C.C. No. 914 of 2005
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, made under the Appellate Jurisdiction Act (Cap 9)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "DAVID THIONG’O T/A WELCOME GENERAL STORES v DAVID THIONG’O T/A WELCOME GENERAL STORES [2007] KECA 492 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2007). Civil Appli 47 of 2007. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2007/492/eng@2007-03-30

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.