Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedEmbu Tribunal Case No. 40 of 2017 (appeal therefrom; notice of motion dated 22nd September 2017)· [2018] KEELC 4846 (KLR)

Arthur Munene Mbogo v Veronica Rwamba Mbogo (Environment & Land Case 9 of 2017) [2018] KEELC 4846 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
18 January 2018
1,722 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Embu High Court refused to pause rent tribunal proceedings while a landlord's appeal was pending, because any harm could be fixed with a costs award.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By notice of motion dated 22nd September 2017, the Appellant sought stay of proceedings and stay of execution of the ruling and orders of the Chairman of the Business Premises Rent Tribunal of 8th September 2017 in Embu Tribunal Case No. 40 of 2017, by which the Tribunal dismissed his preliminary objection to its jurisdiction to entertain the Respondent's reference seeking termination of his tenancy of premises on plot No. 1112/325, Haile Selassie Road, Embu. The Respondent opposed, contending the Appellant had not shown substantial loss, offered no security, and had not shown her to be a person of straw. At the hearing, counsel confirmed stay of execution was overtaken by events (costs already paid upon execution), leaving only stay of proceedings in issue. The court restated the Order 42 Rule 6(2) conditions and the interest-of-justice test for stay of proceedings. It found the appeal arguable and the application brought with reasonable expedition, but held the nugatory test unsatisfied: a successful appeal would nullify the Tribunal's proceedings, and any loss or inconvenience could be compensated by a suitable award of costs. Applying Keter v Kiplagat and Butt v Rent Restriction Tribunal, the court dismissed the motion and ordered that the costs of the application abide the result of the appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Principles for granting stay of execution and stay of proceedings

Holding

The applicant must show substantial loss, that the application was made without unreasonable delay, and must furnish security under Order 42 Rule 6(2); for stay of proceedings, the test is whether it is in the interest of justice

Reasoning

The court restated Order 42 Rule 6(2) requirements and the Ringera J formulation from Global Tours & Travels Ltd, weighing expeditious disposal, arguability of the appeal, judicial time and expedition. It found the appeal arguable and the application filed with reasonable expedition.

p. 3
02

Whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory without stay of proceedings

Holding

No; a successful appeal would nullify the Tribunal's proceedings and any loss could be compensated by costs, so the nugatory test was not satisfied

Reasoning

Applying Keter & 6 Others v Kiplagat, the court examined whether success of the appeal would be rendered nugatory. Since success would nullify the Tribunal's proceedings and decisions, and any inconvenience could be addressed by a suitable award of costs, the balance did not favour a stay.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where an applicant demonstrates that his appeal would be rendered nugatory unless stay is granted, that constitutes demonstration of substantial loss

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated 22nd September 2017 is dismissed
  2. 2.The costs of the application shall abide the result of the appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Actsections 1A, 1B, 3A
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 42 Rules 1 and 6 (including Rule 6(2))
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 51 Rule 1

Cases cited (7)

  • Butt Vs Rent Restriction Tribunal
    [1979] eKLR
  • National Oil Corporation of Kenya Vs Real Energy
    [2017] eKLR
  • Safepark Ltd Vs General Plastics Ltd
    [2012] eKLR
  • Global Tours & Travels Ltd; Nairobi High Court Winding up Cause No. 43 of 2000
  • Gichuki Macharia & Another Vs Kiai Mbaki & 2 Others, Winding up Cause No 1 of 2001
  • Keter & 6 Others Vs Kiplagat and 2 Others
    [2004] 2 KLR 159
  • Wilson Vs Church (No 2)
    12 Ch. D [1879] 454
On appeal from
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Embu Tribunal Case No. 40 of 2017
Jurisdiction invoked
Appeal from the Business Premises Rent Tribunal; application under sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 42 Rules 1 and 6 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Arthur Munene Mbogo v Veronica Rwamba Mbogo (Environment & Land Case 9 of 2017) [2018] KEELC 4846 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Embu Tribunal Case No. 40 of 2017 (appeal therefrom; notice of motion dated 22nd September 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/4846/eng@2018-01-18

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