Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissed· [2018] KEELC 49 (KLR)

Shadrack Bungei (suing as administrator of the Estate of Joseph Kipkering (deceased) v Selina Jerotich (sued as administrator of the Estate of Mary Jepkosge Kiswai (deceased) [2018] KEELC 49 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
12 July 2018
903 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan land court refused to pause execution of a judgment because the applicant waited almost a year without explaining the delay or showing real loss.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff/applicant moved the court by notice of motion dated 23 May 2018 seeking a stay of execution of the court's decree pending hearing and determination of Eldoret Court of Appeal No. 4 of 2018, on the grounds that an appeal raising weighty and substantial issues of law had been filed and that the defendant/respondent had commenced execution. The respondent opposed the application through grounds of opposition and a replying affidavit, arguing that the conditions for stay were not met, that the application was brought after inordinate and unexplained delay, that what was to be executed was the certificate of costs rather than the decree, that she was in occupation of the land, and that any costs paid would be refundable; she alternatively sought deposit of Kshs 185,200.70 in a joint interest-earning account. The court framed two questions: whether the application was brought timeously, and whether the applicant would suffer substantial loss, these being requirements of Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. On delay, the court found a nearly one-year gap between the judgment of 29 May 2017 and the application, with no attempt at explanation, and applying Joseph Yano v Simon Kibet Kiptum, held the delay inordinate and inexcusable. On substantial loss, the court noted the applicant had obtained 16 acres of land, showed no destitution, and the respondent was already in occupation. The application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the application was brought without unreasonable delay

Holding

The delay of nearly one year between judgment (29 May 2017) and the application (23 May 2018) was inordinate and unexplained

Reasoning

The court noted the considerable period between judgment and the filing of the application. The applicant's affidavit contained no attempt to explain the delay. Relying on Joseph Yano v Simon Kibet Kiptum, the court held that explanation of the delay is a necessary legal requirement, and in its absence the delay is inordinate and the application must fail on that ground alone.

p. 2
02

Whether the applicant would suffer substantial loss if stay was not granted

Holding

No substantial loss was demonstrated; the applicant had received 16 acres of land, was not shown to be destitute, and the respondent was already in occupation of the land

Reasoning

The suit concerned land, and the plaintiff had already obtained a total of 16 acres held by his brother, with no indication of destitution. His affidavit did not show substantial loss. The respondent was on the land and indicated the only consequence would be transmission of the land to her name, so no substantial loss within Order 42 Rule 6(2)(a) was established.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An applicant for stay of execution must explain any delay in bringing the application; unexplained inordinate delay is fatal to the application

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 23rd May, 2018 is dismissed with costs to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 Rule 6(2)

Cases cited (1)

  • Joseph Yano Versus Simon Kibet Kiptum
    Kitale ELC Case No. 12 Of 2012
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, "Shadrack Bungei (suing as administrator of the Estate of Joseph Kipkering (deceased) v Selina Jerotich (sued as administrator of the Estate of Mary Jepkosge Kiswai (deceased) [2018] KEELC 49 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/49/eng@2018-07-12

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