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 Application No. E015 of 2020· [2021] KECA 889 (KLR)

Jaffarali Kassam Abdulla v Pauline Mutee Makumu & another [2021] KECA 889 (KLR)

Court of Appeal
19 March 2021
2,129 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal dismissed a stay bid because the applicant ignored a conditional stay from the trial court instead of complying with or appealing it.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Court of Appeal at Mombasa on an application for stay of execution pending appeal under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, brought by Jaffarali Kassam Abdulla against respondents who had obtained judgment in the Environment and Land Court at Busia. The ELC had declared the applicant's purchase and transfer of the suit property null and void, ordered specific performance of a Deed of Agreement dated 27th October 2003, and awarded the respondents compensation of Kshs. 53,000,000 against the applicant and the 1st and 2nd defendants jointly and severally. The ELC (Munyao Sila, J.) granted a conditional stay requiring the applicant to deposit Kshs. 53 million into a joint interest-earning account within 30 days, failing which the respondents would be at liberty to execute. The applicant did not comply, did not appeal against the conditions, and filed the present application over a year after judgment. The Court of Appeal held that although it has jurisdiction to entertain a Rule 5(2)(b) application regardless of whether a similar application was lodged in the court below, an applicant who obtained a conditional stay, ignored its terms and did not challenge them cannot seek the same orders afresh from the appellate court; such conduct is an abuse of process, following Yusuf Kifuma Chanzu v Equity Bank and Hunker Trading Co Ltd v Elf Oil Kenya Ltd. The application was dismissed with costs in the appeal. The ruling binds lower courts on the competence of such repeat applications.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Court of Appeal may entertain a Rule 5(2)(b) stay application after the trial court has granted a conditional stay which the applicant has ignored

Holding

No. Where the lower court has exercised a parallel jurisdiction and granted a conditional stay, the applicant must either comply with the conditions or challenge them on appeal; ignoring the order and seeking identical relief from the appellate court is an abuse of process and renders the application incompetent.

Reasoning

The Court relied on its own precedents Yusuf Kifuma Chanzu v Equity Bank and Hunker Trading Co Ltd v Elf Oil Kenya Ltd, both on materially identical facts. In those cases, an applicant who had obtained stay on terms from the High Court, did not appeal against those terms and did not comply with them, could not invoke Rule 5(2)(b) afresh; the Court would not exercise original jurisdiction where the lower court has exercised a parallel jurisdiction unless impropriety in that exercise is demonstrated.

p. 3
02

Whether delay of over one year in filing the stay application undermined it

Holding

Yes. The application was filed over a year after the impugned judgment, during which the applicant had sufficient time to raise the security ordered by the ELC but did not.

Reasoning

The Court noted that the applicant took one year and two months to file the application after judgment, gave no explanation for the delay, admitted he was unable to avail Kshs. 53,000,000 as ordered by the ELC, and neither complied with the conditional stay nor moved either court to set aside its conditions before the orders lapsed.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to entertain a Rule 5(2)(b) application for stay of execution regardless of whether such an application has been lodged before the court appealed from
  • A party who obtains a conditional stay from the trial court, ignores its conditions and does not challenge them on appeal cannot thereafter seek the same orders from the Court of Appeal under Rule 5(2)(b); such an application is an abuse of process and incompetent

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application for stay of execution pending appeal is dismissed with costs in the appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 5(2)(b)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 rule 6

Cases cited (4)

  • Iris Properties Limited & Another vs City Council of Nairobi
    (2016) eKLR
  • Teacher’s Service Commission vs Kenya National Union of Teachers & 2 Others
  • Yusuf Kifuma Chanzu v Equity Bank Limited & Another
    [2014] eKLR (Civil Application No. 251 of 2013)
  • Hunker Trading Co Ltd vs Elf Oil Kenya Ltd
On appeal from
Environment and Land Court
E.L.C. No. 388 of 2010
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules and Order 42 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Jaffarali Kassam Abdulla v Pauline Mutee Makumu & another [2021] KECA 889 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Civil Application No. E015 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2021/889/eng@2021-03-19

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