Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in the judgment (appeal from Business Premises Rent Tribunal E 953 of 2022)· [2025] KEELC 7150 (KLR)

Burger Chef Limited v Apa Insurance Limited (Land Case Appeal E076 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 7150 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya (sitting at Thika)
16 October 2025
MOMogeni
580 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The High Court dismissed Burger Chef's bid to pause a rent decree, ruling that money judgments can always be repaid, so appeals aren't harmed by execution.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Appellant/Applicant, Burger Chef Limited, moved the court by Notice of Motion dated 6 June 2024 seeking a stay of execution of the judgment of the Business Premises Rent Tribunal delivered on 9 May 2024 in Tribunal Case E 953 of 2022, arguing that execution would cause it substantial loss and render its intended appeal nugatory. The Respondent, APA Insurance Limited, opposed through a Replying Affidavit sworn on 19 June 2024, contending that the Tribunal had reached a fair decision on the evidence, including rival valuations pegging monthly rent at Kshs 64,600 (applicant) and Kshs 176,770 (respondent), leaving a difference of only Kshs 112,170, and that any higher rent paid would be credited to the applicant if the appeal succeeded. The court applied the established three-pronged test for stay pending appeal: no unreasonable delay, demonstration of substantial loss, and provision of security. It found the application timely, having been filed about a month after the decree. However, it held that the decree was monetary, that a money decree would not render an appeal nugatory, and that the applicant, being the respondent's tenant, could be given rebates or refunds if the appeal succeeded. Finding the cornerstone requirement of substantial loss unmet, the court dismissed the application with costs to the respondent on 16 October 2025.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the conditions for stay of execution pending appeal were satisfied

Holding

The application was timely but failed on substantial loss; a monetary decree cannot render an appeal nugatory and the respondent undertook to credit any overpaid rent if the appeal succeeds

Reasoning

The court applied the three-pronged test for stay: timeliness, substantial loss, and security. It found no unreasonable delay since the application was filed within about a month of the decree. However, it held that the decree was monetary in nature and that the respondent, having undertaken to credit rent overpayments, could give rebates or refunds if the appeal succeeded, so the appeal would not be rendered nugatory.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The principles for grant of stay pending appeal are: absence of unreasonable delay, demonstration of substantial loss, and provision of security for due performance of the decree
  • A money decree would not render an appeal nugatory
  • Demonstration of substantial loss is the cornerstone for grant of stay pending appeal

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 6/06/2024 seeking stay of execution pending appeal is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the application to the Respondent
On appeal from
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
E 953 of 2022
Jurisdiction invoked
Appellate/supervisory jurisdiction over the Business Premises Rent Tribunal; specific provision not cited in the judgment

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Burger Chef Limited v Apa Insurance Limited (Land Case Appeal E076 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 7150 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (appeal from Business Premises Rent Tribunal E 953 of 2022). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7150/eng@2025-10-16

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