Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedWinam SRMCC No. 495 of 2004 (stay application, notice of motion dated 22nd May 2015)· [2016] KEELC 897 (KLR)

Ali Gadaffi Hamisi & another v Francis Mulina Mutungu & another [2016] KEELC 897 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
12 May 2016
645 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court in Kisumu dismissed a stay application riddled with drafting errors and barred it as an attempt to relitigate an already-decided request.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Ali Gadaffi Hamisi and Farida A. Salim, the Appellants, moved the Environment and Land Court by notice of motion dated 22nd May 2015 seeking temporary stay of execution of the judgment and decree in Winam SRMCC No. 495 of 2004 dated 20th June 2013, supported by the affidavit of Ali Gadaffi Hamisi. The 2nd Respondents, Bephine N. Shiraho and Margaret A. Shiraho, personal representatives of the estate of Richard Shiraho, opposed through grounds of opposition dated 10th February 2016. The sole issue was whether the Appellants had satisfied the requirements for stay pending appeal under Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court identified multiple fatal defects: the notice of motion referenced Winam SRMCC No. 494 of 2004 while the supporting affidavit referred to No. 495 of 2004, with no correction sought; the prayers were at variance with the affidavit, which suggested the application targeted the ruling of 7th May 2015, yet no affidavit supported the prayers; and the annexed notice of appeal referred to a ruling of 7th May 2014, not 2015. The court further held the application was res judicata, having declined a similar application on 7th May 2015, contravening Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act. The application was found frivolous and an abuse of court process. The notice of motion was dismissed with costs and the interim stay orders of 28th May 2015 were vacated.

Key legal issues

#
01

Requirements for stay pending appeal under Order 42 Rule 6(2)

Holding

Not satisfied; the application was fatally defective

Reasoning

The court found the prayers in the notice of motion referred to a different case number than the supporting affidavit, that the prayers referenced the 2013 decree while the affidavit deposed to the 7th May 2015 ruling, and that no affidavit supported the prayers on the motion. The annexed notice of appeal referred to a ruling of 7th May 2014, not 2015, undermining the asserted appeal. No correction or clarification was sought.

p. 2
02

Res judicata

Holding

The application contravened Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act

Reasoning

The court had already declined a similar application on 7th May 2015; allowing the current application would contravene Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act by being res judicata.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • A court that has declined a similar application cannot grant a later identical application, which is barred by res judicata under Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act
  • A notice of appeal that refers to a ruling delivered on a different date cannot support an application for stay of a different decision

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Notice of motion dated 22nd May 2015 dismissed with costs
  2. 2.Interim orders of stay of 28th May 2015 vacated

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 Rule 6(2)
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 7
On appeal from
Winam Senior Resident Magistrate's Court
SRMCC No. 495 of 2004
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ali Gadaffi Hamisi & another v Francis Mulina Mutungu & another [2016] KEELC 897 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Winam SRMCC No. 495 of 2004 (stay application, notice of motion dated 22nd May 2015). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2016/897/eng@2016-05-12

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