Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNotice of Motion dated 22nd June 2023 (arising from Nyeri MCL & E No. 18 of 2020)· [2024] KEELC 5703 (KLR)

Ihururu Housing Co-operative Society Limited v Ng’ayu & another (Environment and Land Appeal 34 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 5703 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
26 July 2024
1,455 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court dismissed a co-operative society's bid to pause paying a Kshs 765,265 judgment because it showed no real loss and offered no security.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By a Notice of Motion dated 22nd June 2023, Ihururu Housing Co-operative Society Ltd sought a stay of execution of the judgment and decree delivered on 7th November 2022 in Nyeri MCL & E No. 18 of 2020, by which Cecilia Karuru Ngayu was awarded a total of Kshs. 765,265/=. The application, supported by an affidavit of the society's former Vice-Chairman Michael Gachinga Kanure, was premised on the dismissal of an earlier stay application on 14th June 2023, the contention that the appeal would be rendered nugatory, an alleged error on the face of the record, absence of delay, and the arguability of the appeal. The 1st Respondent opposed, arguing the memorandum of appeal raised no arguable grounds and that a valid judgment of a competent court should not be defeated. J. O. Olola J framed the inquiry under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules: substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay, and security for due performance of the decree. Relying on RWW v EKW, James Wangalwa v Agnes Naliaka Chezeto and David Karanja Ngugi v Duncan Rarwat Kereto, the court held that the Appellant had not demonstrated any substantial loss - mere narration of procedural history and repetition of statutory language being insufficient - and, the decree being monetary, the Appellant had failed to offer security for its due performance. The application was dismissed with costs in the Appeal. Orders issued at Nyeri on 26th July 2024.

Key legal issues

#
01

Substantial loss

Holding

The Appellant failed to demonstrate any loss it stood to suffer if stay was not granted

Reasoning

The supporting affidavit merely narrated procedural history - the dismissal of the earlier stay application and entry of judgment - without showing how execution would irreparably affect the Appellant or negate the core of its position as a successful appellant. Repetition of statutory language or general words from precedent does not discharge the duty to demonstrate substantial loss.

p. 4
02

Security for due performance

Holding

A party against whom a monetary decree is entered must offer security to warrant a stay, and none was offered

Reasoning

The decree was monetary (Kshs. 765,265/= including interest and costs). Under Order 42 Rule 6(2)(b), security for due performance of the decree is a mandatory condition. The Appellant did not offer any security, so the threshold for granting stay was not met.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • An applicant for stay of execution must demonstrate substantial loss, absence of undue delay, and offer security for due performance of the decree
  • It is not enough to merely state that substantial loss will result or that the appeal will be rendered nugatory; the applicant must establish other factors showing irreparable effect

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 22nd June 2023 seeking stay of execution is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the application awarded to the Respondents in the Appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 Rule 6

Cases cited (4)

  • RWW v EKW
    [2019] eKLR
  • James Wangalwa & Another v Agnes Naliaka Chezeto
    [2012]
  • David Karanja Ngugi v Duncan Rarwat Kereto
    [2020] eKLR
  • Machira T/A Machira & Co. Advocates v East African Standard No. 2
    {2002} 2 KLR 63
On appeal from
Nyeri Magistrates' Court (MCL & E No. 18 of 2020)
MCL & E No. 18 of 2020
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ihururu Housing Co-operative Society Limited v Ng’ayu & another (Environment and Land Appeal 34 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 5703 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Notice of Motion dated 22nd June 2023 (arising from Nyeri MCL & E No. 18 of 2020). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/5703/eng@2024-07-26

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