Umeme Limited v Rurihoona (Civil Application 213 of 2021)

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.

Holding

The Court of Appeal granted an interim order of stay of execution. It reaffirmed that three conditions must be satisfied for such an order: a competent notice of appeal, a pending substantive application for stay of execution, and a serious threat of execution. Finding that the applicant had filed a competent notice of appeal, had a pending substantive application (No. 212 of 2021), and faced an imminent threat of execution through garnishee proceedings against its bank accounts, the Court was satisfied all conditions were met and issued the interim order pending determination of the substantive application.

Outcome

Interim order of stay of execution granted pending determination of the substantive application for stay of execution

Facts

Umeme Limited applied for an interim order of stay of execution pending determination of its substantive application for stay of execution, which in turn awaited disposal of an intended appeal against the decision in High Court Civil Appeal No. 100 of 2017. The respondent, Rurihoona Elisam, was the judgment creditor and had commenced execution by way of garnishee proceedings and attachment of the applicant's bank accounts held in ABSA Bank (U) Ltd and Stanbic Bank (U) Ltd, filing High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 1148 of 2020. That application had earlier been stayed pending the High Court's determination of the applicant's own stay application, which was subsequently dismissed. The respondent then sought to have his garnishee application fixed for hearing, prompting the applicant to seek interim relief. The applicant had filed a notice of appeal on 23 April 2020 and requested certified copies of the record. The respondent did not appear at the hearing despite effective service.

Issues

1. Whether the applicant satisfied the conditions for the grant of an interim order of stay of execution.

Orders

• The application is granted and an interim order is issued restraining the respondent, his servants, agents, any Garnishee and all Banks holding the applicant's bank accounts from executing or enforcing the orders in High Court Civil Appeal No. 100 of 2017.
• The interim order remains in force pending determination of the substantive Application No. 212 of 2021.
• Application No. 212 of 2021 to be fixed and heard within 30 days from the date of this ruling, which shall be the lifespan of the interim order.
• Costs of this application to abide the outcome of the substantive application.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (1)

• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.56(2)

Cases cited (3)

• Zubeda Muhamed v Laila Kaka Walia (Civil Reference No. 07 of 2016)
• Hwang Sung Industries Ltd v Tajdin Hussein (Civil Appeal No. 19 of 2008)
• Ssekikuubo v Attorney General (Constitutional Application No. 04 of 2014)

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.