Akalale v Munyes (Environment and Land Appeal E001 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 3995 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court dismissed a stay application because the applicant gave no evidence of loss and offered no security.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Conditions for grant of stay of execution under Order 42
The three conditions - no unreasonable delay, substantial loss, and security - must all be met; the applicant failed on substantial loss and security
The court applied established stay jurisprudence: pendency of an appeal is not an automatic stay; the discretion must be exercised on sound principles based on evidential material. The applicant offered only general allegations of loss, no security, and an unexplained delay of nearly a month.
Substantial loss and evidentiary burden
Execution per se is not substantial loss; the applicant tendered no valuation report, photographs, business records or building plans to substantiate the alleged loss
Relying on authorities including Wangalwa v Chesoto and Kang'ethe Kinyanjui, the court held that an applicant must show what loss or damage would negate the substratum of the appeal. The applicant, declared a trespasser with her counterclaim dismissed, did not substantiate the claimed irreparable loss.
Security for due realization of the decree
Security is mandatory and none was offered; willingness to comply with court-imposed terms is not enough
Citing Arun C. Sharma and Focin Motorcycle, the court held that security acts as a guarantee of due performance of the decree and a proposal of security is a mark of good faith. The applicant merely alleged willingness to comply with terms, which the court found insufficient.
Legal principles established
#- A stay applicant must file the application without unreasonable delay, demonstrate substantial loss, and offer security for the due realization of the decree; the three conditions must be met distinctly and separately
- Mere or vague assertions of substantial loss are insufficient; the applicant must lay tangible evidence upon which the court can find substantial loss
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 10/4/2026 seeking stay of execution is dismissed
- 2.The applicant to pay the respondent's costs of the application
- 3.The deputy registrar is directed to call for the lower court file for mention in a month
- On appeal from
- Lower court (not named in the judgment)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 42 of the Civil Procedure Rules (stay of execution pending appeal)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Akalale v Munyes (Environment and Land Appeal E001 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 3995 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment (application dated 10/4/2026). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3995/eng@2026-06-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.