Radar Security Limited v Obiele (Appeal E189 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2704 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court paused enforcement of a Kshs 712,966 judgment against Wananchi Online, but only if the company deposits the money in a joint account within 30 days.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Applicant demonstrated substantial loss to justify stay of execution
Yes - the Court found the Applicant's apprehension of execution real and likely to cause substantial loss, noting the Respondent had not demonstrated financial means to refund the decretal sum if the appeal succeeded
The Applicant averred exposure to massive financial loss, proclamation, attachment and sale of property upon the dismissal of its review application. The Court reasoned that stay preserves the subject matter and balances competing interests: the Respondent's right to enjoy the fruits of judgment against the Applicant's right to an appeal that is not rendered nugatory. Because the Respondent did not show ability to refund the decretal sum should the appeal succeed, the apprehension of substantial loss was held to be real.
Whether the application was made without unreasonable delay
Yes - the Ruling was delivered on 13th June 2025 and the application lodged on 19th June 2025, which the Court found timeous
Applying the second condition in Order 42 Rule 6(2)(a), the Court measured the interval between delivery of the Ruling sought to be appealed and the lodging of the Motion. A six-day interval was held to satisfy the requirement that the application be made without unreasonable delay.
Whether the Applicant offered adequate security for the due performance of the decree
Stay was granted on condition that the Applicant deposits the decretal sum of Kshs. 712,966.20 in a joint interest-earning account within 30 days; the proposal to deposit motor vehicle logbooks was rejected due to prior default of an order of 16th May 2024
Security operates to safeguard the decree-holder's entitlement to the fruits of judgment while preserving the appellant's right of appeal. The total award of Kshs 712,966.20 became due on delivery of judgment. The Applicant's renewed offer of logbooks was untenable because it had not refuted its breach of the earlier 16th May 2024 order directing deposit of a logbook within 30 days. The Court therefore conditioned the stay on deposit of the decretal sum itself, with automatic vacation of the stay upon default.
Legal principles established
#- Substantial loss is the cornerstone of the jurisdiction to grant stay of execution
- Security for due performance balances the successful litigant's right to enjoy the fruits of judgment against the appellant's right of appeal
- The three conditions for stay under Order 42 Rule 6(2) must all be satisfied by an applicant
Court orders
#- 1.An order of stay of execution of the Judgment delivered on 9th September 2022 in Milimani CMEL No. 130 of 2018 is hereby granted, pending the hearing and determination of the Applicant's Appeal
- 2.The Applicant shall deposit the decretal sum of Kshs. 712,966.20 in an interest-earning account to be opened in the joint names of the Advocates on record for the parties within thirty (30) days from the date hereof
- 3.In default of compliance with the deposit order, the stay of execution shall stand automatically vacated
- 4.There will be no orders as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 42 Rule 6(1)(a)(b) and (3) and Order 40 Rules 1 & 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Radar Security Limited v Obiele (Appeal E189 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2704 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Notice of Motion dated 19th June 2025 (arising from Nairobi CMEL Case No. 130 of 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2704/eng@2025-10-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.