Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNotice of motion dated 4th March 2019 (appeal against judgement in Runyenjes SRMCC 3/18)· [2019] KEELC 2095 (KLR)

Elijah Njeru Mugo & another v Njeru Samwel M’rwingo [2019] KEELC 2095 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
18 July 2019
1,665 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 High Court in Embu ruled you cannot appeal a dismissed case, but you can still get injunctions and land restrictions to protect your position while the appeal is decided.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling by the High Court at Embu (Angima J) determined a notice of motion dated 4th March 2019 by the Appellants, Elijah Njeru Mugo and Patrick Kinyua Samwel, seeking stay of execution of the judgment of the Magistrate's Court at Runyenjes in SRMCC 3/18 dated 14th February 2019 dismissing their suit, together with temporary injunctions and inhibition orders over land parcel Kagaari/Kanja/1011 pending their appeal. The Respondent opposed, contending that the application was misconceived because the suit had merely been dismissed, leaving nothing to stay, and that the conditions for stay under Order 42 Rule 6 had not been satisfied. The court agreed that a dismissal is a negative order incapable of being stayed, adopting the Court of Appeal's decision in Western College of Arts & Applied Sciences v Oranga and subsequent authorities. However, the court considered whether the Appellants were entitled to an interlocutory injunction under Order 40 Rule 1 and an inhibition under section 68 of the Land Registration Act 2012. Noting uncontroverted evidence that the Appellants had occupied and developed part of the suit property with 3000 tea bushes since 1999, and that the Respondent had allegedly cut down their trees, the court held that the Appellants were entitled to interim protection: evicting them pending the appeal would cause greater hardship, and alienation of the property could render the appeal nugatory. The court issued a temporary injunction restraining interference with the tea bushes and trees, and directed the Land Registrar Embu to register an inhibition over the parcel, both pending conclusion of the appeal. Costs were awarded as costs in the appeal, and the Appellants were directed to file a record of appeal and prosecute the appeal within two years, failing which the interim orders would lapse.

Key legal issues

#
01

Availability of stay under Order 42 Rule 6 of a negative decree

Holding

Stay is not available because the decree dismissed the suit and contains no positive orders capable of execution

Reasoning

The court adopted the reasoning in Western College of Arts & Applied Sciences v Oranga, that where the court below merely dismissed a suit without ordering any party to do or refrain from doing anything, the only thing capable of execution is costs, and there is nothing arising from such a judgment for which stay can be granted. This was reinforced by Kilindini Warehouses and Sonalux Limited.

p. 2
02

Entitlement to interlocutory injunction and inhibition pending appeal

Holding

The court found the appellants entitled to preservation measures: a temporary injunction and an inhibition to maintain the status quo pending the appeal

Reasoning

There was uncontroverted evidence that the appellants had utilized and developed part of the suit property since 1999. The court reasoned that evicting them during the pendency of the appeal would cause greater hardship than maintaining the status quo, and that alienation of the property before the appeal concluded could render the appeal nugatory, producing a barren result if the appellants ultimately succeeded.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A dismissal order is a negative order which is not capable of being stayed under Order 42 Rule 6
  • The court has a duty to preserve property in issue to prevent an appeal from being rendered nugatory

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order of temporary injunction restraining the Respondent, his agents, servants or assigns from interfering with the 1st Appellant's user and enjoyment of tea bushes and trees growing on Title Kagaari/Kanja/1011 pending the hearing and determination of the appeal
  2. 2.The Land Registrar Embu shall register an order of inhibition to prevent any dealings with Title No. Kagaari/Kanja/1011 pending the conclusion of the appeal
  3. 3.Costs of the application shall be costs in the appeal
  4. 4.The Appellants shall file a record of appeal and expeditiously prosecute the appeal within two years, in default of which the interim orders shall lapse

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 40 Rule 1(a) & (b)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 Rule 6(1) & (2)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51 Rule 1
  • Civil Procedure Act (Cap. 21)Sections 1, 1A, 1B, 3 & 3A
  • Land Registration Act 2012Section 68

Cases cited (7)

  • Western College of Arts & Applied Sciences V Oranga & Others
    [1976 – 80] KLR 78
  • Kilindini Warehouses (K) Ltd & Another V Omar Saleh Said & Another
    [2014] eKLR
  • Sonalux Limited & Another V Barclays Bank of Kenya Ltd
    Nairobi Civil Application No. 219 of 2007
  • Shah & Partners Ltd Vs National Social Security Fund Board of Trustees & 3 Others
    [2018] eKLR
  • Stanley Kangethe Kinyanjui & Tony Ketter & 5 Others
    [2013] eKLR
  • Reliance Bank Ltd V Norlake Investments Ltd
    [2002] 1 EA 227
  • Shivabhai Patel Vs Manibhai Patel
    [1959] EA 907
On appeal from
Magistrate's Court at Runyenjes
Runyenjes SRMCC 3/18
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 40 Rule 1(a) & (b), Order 42 Rule 6(1) & (2), Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules and sections 1, 1A, 1B, 3 & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap. 21)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Elijah Njeru Mugo & another v Njeru Samwel M’rwingo [2019] KEELC 2095 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Notice of motion dated 4th March 2019 (appeal against judgement in Runyenjes SRMCC 3/18). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/2095/eng@2019-07-18

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