Jamlick Murumia v Respondent (Nkubu PM ELC Case No. E039 of 2019)
The bottom line
#The High Court dismissed an application for stay of execution and injunction because the applicant delayed nearly a year and never showed any substantial loss.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether stay of execution pending appeal was warranted
No - the prayer as drafted sought stay only pending inter-partes hearing, which would be futile; and no substantial loss was pleaded or proved, nor was delay explained
The court observed that the stay prayer was limited to the inter-partes hearing of the application, making the relief incomprehensible and futile. Substantial loss, the cornerstone of stay pending appeal, was never mentioned in the application. Further, the judgment was rendered on 11th January 2024 yet the application was filed on 18th December 2024, an inordinate and unexplained delay defeating the equitable discretion.
Whether a temporary injunction and inhibition over the suit property were warranted
No - no prima facie case was established; the Applicant is not the registered owner and the registered owner was not joined as a party
The Applicant conceded the suit property is registered in the name of Wilfred Kinoti Nkonge, who was not a party; any order would contravene the right to fair hearing, due process, natural justice and Article 50 of the Constitution. Without rights over the property, no prima facie case existed, and the court was not required to consider irreparable loss, the injunction conditions being sequential.
Legal principles established
#- Substantial loss is the cornerstone of an order of stay of execution pending appeal and must be deposed to and substantiated, not speculated upon
- An applicant for stay must move the court timeously and must explain any inordinate delay
- In an adversarial system, parties and the court are bound by the pleadings
- The conditions for a temporary injunction are sequential; failure to establish a prima facie case obviates inquiry into irreparable loss
Court orders
#- 1.The Application dated December 18, 2024 be and is hereby dismissed
- 2.Costs of the Application are awarded to the Defendant/Respondent
- On appeal from
- Nkubu Principal Magistrate's Court (Environment and Land)
- Nkubu PM ELC Case No. E039 of 2019
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appellate/supervisory jurisdiction over the subordinate court in an appeal from Nkubu PM ELC Case No. E039 of 2019; relief sought under Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 and Section 68 of the Land Registration Act 2012
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jamlick Murumia v Respondent (Nkubu PM ELC Case No. E039 of 2019)", Case Analysis (2025). Notice of Motion Application dated 18th December 2024 (Nkubu PM ELC Case No. E039 of 2019). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/360/eng@2025-02-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.