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 AppealPartially AllowedCivil Appeal (Application) No. 120 of 2020· [2020] KECA 240 (KLR)

Gulf African Bank Limited v Tejprakash Sehmi & 2 others [2020] KECA 240 (KLR)

Court of Appeal
23 October 2020
3,293 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~13 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal stopped execution of a land judgment against Gulf African Bank, confirming lenders can get stays when appeals raise arguable grounds.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicant, Gulf African Bank Limited, held legal charges over Nairobi Block 55/78 (formerly LR No. 209/4844/1) given by Petroafric Company Limited to secure a Kshs. 30,000,000 facility. The Environment and Land Court (Bor, J.) entered judgment on 8th August 2019 in favour of Tejprakash Sehmi, cancelling the subject title and restoring the original registration, without the bank having been joined or heard. The bank's application to be joined, to set aside the judgment and to stay execution was dismissed by a ruling dated 3rd February 2020, prompting this appeal. The bank then moved the Court of Appeal under sections 3A and 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules for stay of execution and injunction pending appeal. Applying the twin-principle test from Stanley Kangethe Kinyanjui vs. Tony Ketter, the court found the nine grounds of appeal arguable, particularly the infringement of the right to be heard and want of ELC jurisdiction. On nugatory-impact, the court noted that the charged property was the very property adjudged to the 1st respondent, that neither respondent offered security or demonstrated sufficient assets to meet any loss, and that the 1st respondent did not controvert the applicant's apprehension by replying affidavit. On 30th July 2020 the court granted prayers 2, 3 and 4 and reserved reasons, which were delivered on 23rd October 2020, affirming the interim orders, directing speedy processing of the appeal, and ordering costs of the application to await the outcome of the appeal. The application thus succeeded.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the appeal is arguable

Holding

All nine grounds of appeal were found arguable, including infringement of the right to be heard, want of ELC jurisdiction, and locus standi of the 1st respondent.

Reasoning

The court reviewed the nine grounds in the memorandum of appeal, including the right to be heard, jurisdiction of the ELC, and locus standi, and concluded that the grounds were arguable even if they might not ultimately succeed. Under the twin-principle test, a single bona fide arguable ground suffices and an arguable appeal need not necessarily succeed.

p. 4
02

Whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory if stay is not granted

Holding

The appeal would be rendered nugatory because the suit property could be disposed of or change character, and neither respondent rebutted the applicant's apprehension of substantial loss.

Reasoning

The charged property is the same property adjudged to the 1st respondent. The applicant pleaded apprehension that the property would disappear, change hands or character, rendering it out of reach. Neither respondent proposed security or demonstrated sufficient assets; the 1st respondent did not controvert the claim by replying affidavit, so the loss would be irreversible and not compensable by damages.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • An applicant under Rule 5(2)(b) must satisfy the twin principles that the appeal is arguable and that it will be rendered nugatory if the orders sought are not granted.
  • The onus shifts to a respondent to rebut by evidence an allegation that the appeal will be rendered nugatory on account of the respondent's alleged impunity.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Affirmation of the interim orders issued on 30th July 2020 (stay of execution, injunction restraining execution of the ELC judgment, and restraint on interference with the applicant's charges over Nairobi Block 55/78)
  2. 2.Direction to the registry to liaise with the parties with a view to processing the appeal for speedy hearing and disposal
  3. 3.Costs of the application to await the outcome of the appeal
On appeal from
Environment and Land Court
Nairobi ELC No. 703 of 2011
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 3A and 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules 2010

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Gulf African Bank Limited v Tejprakash Sehmi & 2 others [2020] KECA 240 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Civil Appeal (Application) No. 120 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2020/240/eng@2020-10-23

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