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 No. 88 of 2008 (UR 51/2008)· [2008] KECA 205 (KLR)

John Michael Njenga Mututho v Jayne Njeri Wanjiku Kihara & 2 others [2008] KECA 205 (KLR)

Court of Appeal
6 June 2008
1,309 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 confirmed that winning a stay application requires more than an arguable appeal — you must show the appeal will be worthless without one.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi (Omolo, Tunoi and Onyango Otieno, JJA) on a notice of motion under rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules by John Michael Njenga Mututho, MP for Naivasha, seeking a stay of proceedings and orders in Election Petition No. 2 of 2008 before the High Court at Nakuru (Koome, J) pending an intended appeal. The 1st respondent had petitioned under section 44 of the Constitution and the National Assembly and Presidential Elections Act challenging the applicant's election, seeking scrutiny, recount and nullification. The judge had on 30th April 2008 dismissed the applicant's application to strike out the petition on the ground that it did not plead the results as required by rule 4(1)(b) of the Election Petition Rules. Before the Court of Appeal, prayers 1 to 3 of the motion had been overtaken by events, the hearing having already proceeded on 19th to 21st May 2008. The Court assumed the appeal was arguable but held that arguability alone does not entitle a party to a stay; the applicant had to show the appeal, if successful, would be rendered nugatory. Applying Silverstein v Chesoni and Kenya Commercial Bank v Benjoh Amalgamated, and finding no special distinguishing factors, the Court dismissed the motion with costs. It also expressed doubt about its mandate to issue 'directions' on the conduct of the election petition, though it made no ruling on that point since no party raised it.

Key legal issues

#
01

The test for stay of proceedings pending appeal under rule 5(2)(b)

Holding

The applicant must show an arguable appeal and, in addition, that unless stay is granted the appeal, if successful, would be rendered nugatory. Arguability alone is insufficient; the Court must follow its established precedent.

Reasoning

The Court assumed in the applicant's favour that the appeal was arguable, noting that arguable does not mean bound to succeed. Relying on KENYA COMMERCIAL BANK LTD vs. BENJOH AMALGAMATED LTD and SILVERSTEIN vs. CHESONI, it held that where the trial proceedings would simply be heard and determined and an appropriate costs order could remedy any prejudice, the appeal would not be rendered nugatory. No special distinguishing factors were shown.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • An arguable appeal alone does not entitle a party to a stay; the applicant must additionally show that the appeal's success would be rendered nugatory if stay is refused.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated 7th May, 2008 and lodged in the court on 8th May, 2008 was dismissed with costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaSection 44
  • National Assembly and Presidential Elections Act Cap 7 Laws of KenyaSection 44
  • National Assembly and Presidential Election (Election Petition) RulesRule 4(1)(b)
  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 5(2)(b)

Cases cited (2)

  • KENYA COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. VS. BENJOH AMALGAMATED LTD.
    Civil Application No. Nai. 50 of 2001 (unreported)
  • SILVERSTEIN VS. CHESONI
    [2002] KLR 867
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nakuru
H.C. Election Petition No. 2 of 2008
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 5(2)(b) of the Rules of this Court (Court of Appeal Rules)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "John Michael Njenga Mututho v Jayne Njeri Wanjiku Kihara & 2 others [2008] KECA 205 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2008). Civil Appli No. 88 of 2008 (UR 51/2008). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2008/205/eng@2008-06-06

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