Levnel Enterprises Limited & another v Grofin Sgb Kenya Limited & another [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
W. Warsame, A.K. Murgor, F. Sichale
Judgment Date
October 23, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3

Case Brief: Levnel Enterprises Limited & another v Grofin Sgb Kenya Limited & another [2020] eKLR


1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Levnel Enterprises Limited & Fredrick G. Ndegwa v. Grofin SGB Kenya Limited & Antique Auctioneers
- Case Number: Civil Application No. 172 of 2020
- Court: Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Date Delivered: 23rd October 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): W. Warsame, A.K. Murgor, F. Sichale
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues before the court included whether the applicants demonstrated an arguable appeal regarding the sale of their charged property and whether an injunction should be granted to prevent the respondents from interfering with the property pending the appeal.

3. Facts of the Case:
The applicants, Levnel Enterprises Limited and Fredrick G. Ndegwa, sought an injunction against the respondents, Grofin SGB Kenya Limited and Antique Auctioneers. The application arose from a ruling by the High Court of Kenya, delivered by Justice Maureen Odero on 16th June 2020, which dismissed their request for an injunction related to the sale of property identified as L.R No. Samurumwitingiri/Block 1/798. The applicants claimed that the sale was improper due to the failure to serve a statutory notice of sale. The 2nd applicant, Ndegwa, emphasized the sentimental value of the property, which served as his family and matrimonial home.

4. Procedural History:
The case began with the applicants filing a Notice of Appeal on 23rd June 2020, intending to challenge the High Court’s ruling. They subsequently filed a Motion on 25th June 2020, seeking an injunction pending the determination of their appeal. The respondents did not file a replying affidavit, and the court considered the applicants' submissions dated 8th July 2020. The High Court's previous ruling was critical in the court's analysis of the current application.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered Article 159 of the Constitution and Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, which govern the issuance of injunctions pending appeal. The principles established in previous cases, particularly the need to demonstrate an arguable appeal and the potential for the appeal to be rendered nugatory without a stay, were also relevant.
- Case Law: The court referenced the case of *Stanley Kang’ethe Kinyanjui vs. Tony Keter & 5 Others [2013] eKLR*, which outlines the principles for granting injunctions pending appeal. Additionally, *Kenya Commercial Bank Limited vs. Tamarind Meadows Limited & 7 others [2016] eKLR* was cited to support the argument that the applicants must show that the denial of the injunction would adversely affect their appeal.
- Application: The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate an arguable appeal, particularly noting that the statutory notice was served to the 2nd applicant’s postal address and that the indebtedness was not denied. The court concluded that the respondents, being a financial institution, were likely able to refund the amounts recovered if necessary. The court ultimately ruled that the applicants did not meet the criteria for an injunction.

6. Conclusion:
The Court of Appeal disallowed the applicants' motion for an injunction, concluding that they did not demonstrate an arguable appeal that would be rendered nugatory without a stay. The ruling emphasized the importance of adherence to statutory requirements in property sales and the burden on applicants to establish the necessity of injunctive relief.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions in this ruling, as the decision was unanimous among the judges.

8. Summary:
The Court of Appeal's ruling in *Levnel Enterprises Limited & Fredrick G. Ndegwa v. Grofin SGB Kenya Limited & Antique Auctioneers* underscores the stringent requirements for obtaining an injunction pending appeal. The court's emphasis on the need for demonstrable grounds for an appeal and the financial viability of the respondents highlights the legal principles governing property rights and the enforcement of financial agreements. The outcome serves as a significant reference for future cases involving similar legal questions in Kenya.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Levnel-Enterprises-Limited--another-v-Grofin-Sgb-Kenya-Limited--another-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2738_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries