Nakakande v Kimera & Another (Miscellaneous Application 321 of 2023)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The High Court dismissed the application for stay of execution, holding that the applicant failed to establish substantial loss, unreasonable delay, or imminent threat of execution. The court found that execution had already commenced with the transfer of the certificate of title and electricity supply applications by the 2nd respondent. The applicant had not demonstrated loss beyond that suffered by any unsuccessful litigant, and the balance of hardship favored the successful judgment creditor who was entitled to the fruits of his judgment.
Outcome
Application dismissed; execution to proceed; non-compliance declared contempt of court
Facts
The applicant/plaintiff brought an application to stay execution of a decree entered against her in Civil Suit No. 63 of 2020 pending her appeal to the Court of Appeal. Judgment in the main suit had been delivered on 18 July 2023. The applicant filed a notice of appeal on 27 July 2023 and requested certified copies of the judgment and proceedings. The decree concerned administration of an estate and a Memorandum of Understanding whereby the 2nd respondent was to acquire suit property at Kyadondo Block 270 Plot 972 at Kiwatule with rental units. By the time the stay application was filed on 26 October 2023, the 2nd respondent had already transferred the certificate of title into his name (Instrument No. KCCA-0010889) and applied to UMEME to change electricity lines into his name on 22 September 2023. The applicant continued to reside on the property and collect rental income. The 2nd respondent had offered compensation for developments on the land, but the applicant refused to collect the money or provide bank details for deposit.
Issues
- Whether execution of the decree in Civil Suit No. 63 of 2020 should be stayed pending the hearing and determination of the civil appeal in the Court of Appeal
Orders
- Application for stay of execution of the decree in Civil Suit No. 63 of 2020 denied.
- Execution of the decree in Civil Suit No. 63 of 2020 to proceed.
- Failure to comply with the decree and orders in Civil Suit No. 63 of 2020 shall amount to contempt of court.
- Costs awarded to the 1st and 2nd Respondents.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
Cases cited (9)
- Wilson v Church (1879) 12 Ch D 454
- Global Capital Save 2004 Ltd & Another v Alice Okiror & Another (HCMA No. 485 of 2012)
- Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (SCCA No. 18 of 1990)
- Kyambogo University v Professor Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (CA No. 341 of 2013)
- Walusimbi Mustafa v Musenze Lukera (HCMA No. 232 of 2018)
- Shell Ltd v Kiburu & Another (1986) 1 KLR 410
- Formula Feeds Limited & Others v KCB Bank Limited (HCMA No. 1647 of 2022)
- Alice Wambui Nganga v. John Ngure Kahoro and another, ELC Case No. 482 of 2017 (at Thika); [2021] eKLR
- John Baptist Kawaga v Namyalo Kevina & Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 12 of 2017)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.