Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment (petition number not reproduced)· [2021] KEELC 1956 (KLR)

Kenya Civil Aviation Authority v National Land Commission & 3 others; Kenya Commercial Bank Limited (Interested Party) [2021] KEELC 1956 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
16 September 2021
2,184 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court paused a land case for twelve months because Weston Hotel's appeal on jurisdiction had real merit and proceeding first would waste the court's time.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is an interlocutory ruling of the Environment and Land Court (B M Eboso J) on a notice of motion dated 29/4/2021 by Weston Hotel Limited, the 2nd respondent in the petition, seeking a stay of further proceedings in the petition pending its appeal to the Court of Appeal against a ruling dated 3/3/2021, in which the ELC had dismissed the 2nd respondent's application challenging the court's jurisdiction. The applicant argued it had an arguable appeal - contending that the court had decided an issue not before it - and that the appeal would be rendered nugatory if the petition proceeded. The petitioner opposed, arguing the application was belated and that no nugatory effect was shown; the 1st respondent likewise opposed; the 3rd respondent supported the application; the interested party took no position. The court identified a single question: whether the criteria for stay of further proceedings pending appeal were met. It restated the framework under Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 42 rule 6(1), and the twin requirements of an arguable appeal and nugatory effect, citing Silverstein v Atsango Chesoni and Re Global Tours. It held the missing supporting affidavit immaterial, as no facts were contested. Finding an arguable jurisdictional appeal on file and record, and noting the petition was near final disposition by submissions, the court held that proceeding would risk wasting judicial time. The application was allowed: stay of further proceedings granted for twelve months, costs in the cause, with the file to be reallocated at Nairobi (Milimani) following the judge's transfer to Thika.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the applicant satisfied the twin criteria for stay of further proceedings pending appeal

Holding

Yes - the applicant demonstrated an arguable appeal (that the court considered an issue not before it) and that disposing of the petition while the jurisdictional appeal was pending would waste judicial time and risk rendering the appeal nugatory.

Reasoning

The applicant promptly appealed the ruling on jurisdiction and lodged the record of appeal. The uncontroverted ground that the court decided an issue not before it sufficed to show arguability. Because the parties had agreed to dispose of the petition by affidavit evidence and submissions, proceeding to final judgment would waste judicial time if the appeal on jurisdiction succeeded. Stay was granted for twelve months.

p. 3
02

Whether the missing supporting affidavit vitiated the motion

Holding

No - the affidavit was not mandatory because the motion did not rest on contested facts.

Reasoning

Although the supporting affidavit of Michael Nzile was not uploaded with the application, the point was not canvassed at the hearing. Under Order 51 rule 4, a supporting affidavit is mandatory only where a motion is grounded on evidence or contested facts. There was no contestation of the facts, so the court declined to rest its decision on the missing affidavit.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A party seeking a stay of proceedings pending appeal must show an arguable appeal and that the appeal would be rendered nugatory unless stay is granted, and must move without unreasonable delay.
  • Stay of proceedings is a matter of judicial discretion exercised in the interest of justice, weighing expeditious disposal, arguability of the intended appeal, judicial time and expedition of the application.
  • A supporting affidavit is a mandatory requirement for a motion only where the motion is grounded on evidence or contested facts.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 29/4/2021 is allowed and the applicant is granted an order of stay of further proceedings in the petition for a period of twelve (12) months, during which the applicant is expected to prosecute and procure a determination of the appeal
  2. 2.Costs of the application shall be in the cause
  3. 3.The petition to be mentioned before the Presiding Judge at Nairobi (Milimani) for allocation of the file to a judge based at Nairobi (Milimani) Environment and Land Court Station
On appeal from
null
null
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 42 rule 6(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules (stay of further proceedings pending appeal)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Civil Aviation Authority v National Land Commission & 3 others; Kenya Commercial Bank Limited (Interested Party) [2021] KEELC 1956 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment (petition number not reproduced). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/1956/eng@2021-09-16

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