Jane Wangui Macharia & 2 others v Ruth Mohagi Macharia & another [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Environment and Land Court at Nyahururu
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
M.C. Oundo
Judgment Date
September 29, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case of Jane Wangui Macharia & 2 others v Ruth Mohagi Macharia & another [2020] eKLR, focusing on key legal principles, findings, and the implications for similar disputes. Stay informed with this comprehensive case summary.

Case Brief: Jane Wangui Macharia & 2 othersv Ruth Mohagi Macharia & another [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Jane Wangui Macharia & Others v. Ruth Mohagi Macharia & Catherine Wangechi Mugo
- Case Number: ELC Appeal No 16 of 2019
- Court: Environment and Land Court of Kenya at Nyahururu
- Date Delivered: 29th September 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): M.C. Oundo
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues that the court must resolve include:
- Whether the Applicants have demonstrated sufficient cause for the stay of execution of the judgment delivered on 9th October 2019.
- Whether the Applicants have satisfied the conditions necessary for granting a stay of execution pending the hearing and determination of their appeal.

3. Facts of the Case:
The parties involved in the case are the Applicants, Jane Wangui Macharia, Alice Wambui Muiga, and Mary Wangui Macharia, and the Respondents, Ruth Mohagi Macharia and Catherine Wangechi Mugo. The Applicants are biological daughters of the 1st Respondent, Ruth Mohagi Macharia, who inherited the disputed land from their deceased father. On 9th October 2019, the subordinate court ruled against the Applicants, leading them to file an appeal. They sought a stay of execution of the judgment, arguing that execution would cause them substantial loss. The Respondents contended that the decree had already been fully executed, and the Applicants had not met the conditions for a stay of execution.

4. Procedural History:
The Applicants filed a Notice of Motion on 13th January 2020 seeking a stay of execution pending appeal. The application was supported by an affidavit from Jane Wangui Macharia. The 2nd Respondent opposed the application through a replying affidavit, arguing that the decree had been executed, and the Applicants had not demonstrated a likelihood of success on appeal. The court, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, directed that the application be determined through written submissions. The court ultimately dismissed the Applicants' motion on 29th September 2020.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The relevant statutes considered were Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which outlines the conditions for granting a stay of execution. The court emphasized that a stay can only be granted if the applicant demonstrates substantial loss, files the application without unreasonable delay, and provides security for the due performance of the decree.
- Case Law: The court cited several previous cases, including *MM vs PM* [2018] eKLR, *Mukuma vs Abuoga* (1988) KLR 645, and *Arun C Sharma v Ashana Raikundalia* [2014] eKLR, which provided guidance on what constitutes substantial loss and the necessity of providing security.
- Application: The court found that the Applicants failed to demonstrate substantial loss as the decree had already been executed. The 2nd Respondent was in possession of the land, and the Applicants did not show how their appeal would be rendered nugatory. Additionally, the court noted that the application was filed three months after the judgment without any explanation for the delay, indicating laches on the part of the Applicants. Lastly, the Applicants did not furnish any security as required by the rules.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled against the Applicants, denying their motion for a stay of execution. The decision underscored the importance of fulfilling procedural requirements for stays of execution, emphasizing that the Applicants had not met the necessary conditions, which included demonstrating substantial loss and providing security. This ruling reinforces the principle that successful litigants should not be deprived of the fruits of their judgment without compelling reasons.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the ruling.

8. Summary:
The Environment and Land Court of Kenya dismissed the Applicants' motion for a stay of execution of the judgment delivered on 9th October 2019. The court found that the Applicants had not satisfied the legal requirements for a stay, particularly regarding the demonstration of substantial loss and the provision of security. This case highlights the strict adherence to procedural rules in civil litigation and the importance of timely and substantiated applications in the context of appeals.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Jane-Wangui-Macharia--2-others-v-Ruth-Mohagi-Macharia--another-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1170_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries