Water Resources Management Authority v Krystalline Salt Limited [2018] KEELC 3078 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court paused enforcement of a Kshs 3 billion judgment, but only because the losing company promised a Kshs 1 billion bank guarantee within 45 days.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Conditions for stay under Order 42 Rule 6
The three conditions — no inordinate delay, substantial loss, and willingness to furnish security — framed the court's enquiry, and stay was granted subject to security
The Defendant applied within 3 days of the judgment, claimed the decree exceeded its assets and that the Plaintiff could not refund the sum on appeal, and offered a bank guarantee. The court accepted that security should be furnished but fixed its quantum at Kshs. 1 Billion, taking into account the Defendant's provisional accounts showing a 2017 profit of Kshs. 2,496,890,535 and a WARMA provision of Kshs. 2,079,455,000 made in anticipation of the claim.
Quantum and form of security
Security must meet the performance of the decree; the court has discretion on the amount depending on circumstances
The Plaintiff relied on Antoine Ndiaye v. African Virtual University where half the decretal sum was paid and half deposited; the Defendant distinguished it as involving no demonstrated substantial loss. The Defendant conceded the court's discretion on the amount of security. The court balanced the parties' interests, considering the Defendant's audited-provisional financials and ordered a Kshs. 1 Billion bank guarantee as the condition for stay.
Legal principles established
#- Stay of execution pending appeal may be granted conditional on the applicant furnishing security for the due performance of the decree
Court orders
#- 1.Stay of execution of the decree granted on condition that the Defendant furnishes security by way of a bank guarantee from a reputable bank for the sum of Kshs. 1 Billion within 45 days
- 2.Each party to bear its own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules (stay of execution pending appeal)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Water Resources Management Authority v Krystalline Salt Limited [2018] KEELC 3078 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Application dated 16/4/2018 (arising from judgment delivered 5/4/2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/3078/eng@2018-05-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.