Cindy Cynthia Orwa t/a Cytle Cindy v Sugarland Estate’s Limited [2019] KEELC 419 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court in Eldoret dismissed a tenant's stay application because she disclosed key facts incompletely and appealed the wrong tribunal order.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Material non-disclosure in ex parte applications
The ex parte stay orders were obtained by material non-disclosure and were vacated.
The court held that an applicant must disclose all material facts when seeking ex parte relief, citing the principles in Bahadurali Ebrahim Shamji v Al Noor Jamal. Where the inter partes hearing reveals non-disclosure, the offending party cannot benefit from the court's equitable discretion. The court exercised its wide but judicious discretion, as recognised in GOTV Kenya v Royal Media Services, to discharge the orders.
Whether stay can issue where no appeal lies against the order sought to be stayed
Stay of execution cannot be granted where the appeal is not directed against the order sought to be stayed; the appellant's appeal is against the 26th July 2019 ruling on quantum, not the 12th April 2019 judgment terminating the tenancy.
Relying on Raymond M Omboga v Austine Pyan Maranga and Wangui Kathryn Kimani, the court held that stay pending appeal is only available against the order being appealed. The appellant's appeal challenges the review ruling on compensation quantum, yet the stay sought relates to the judgment extinguishing her tenancy, against which no appeal was filed. Having accepted the cheque for Kshs. 257,800, she acknowledged her tenancy was extinguished.
Conditions for stay of execution under Order 42 Rule 6
Substantial loss, the cornerstone for granting stay, was not established.
Applying Kenya Shell v Benjamin Karuga Kibiru and Macharia v East African Standard, the court found the appellant had not specified or demonstrated substantial loss likely to ensue if stay was refused. The appeal concerned only quantum of compensation, not her tenancy, and she could not simultaneously retain the benefits of the ruling she accepted and resist vacating the premises.
Legal principles established
#- Stay of execution pending appeal can only be granted against the order being appealed against
- A party who obtains ex parte orders without full and fair disclosure of material facts cannot retain the advantage of those orders
Court orders
#- 1.The ex parte orders issued on 29th August 2019 are vacated for material non-disclosure
- 2.The application dated 28th August 2019 is dismissed with costs to the respondent
- On appeal from
- Business Premises and Rent Tribunal
- Eldoret BPRT Case No. 73 of 2018
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Section 15 Cap 301 Laws of Kenya
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Sunland Roses Limited v Eunice Mukwanyaga Nduati & 4 others[2026] KEELC 6099 (KLR)24 Sept 2026
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Cindy Cynthia Orwa t/a Cytle Cindy v Sugarland Estate’s Limited [2019] KEELC 419 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Eldoret ELC Appeal No. 29 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/419/eng@2019-11-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.