Case ID:165200

Bedrock Holdings Limited v Bedrock Security Services Limited & 2 others [2020] eKLR

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Civil Suit 134 of 2009

Parties:

Bedrock Holdings Limited v Bedrock Security Services Limited, Erick Ouma Okeyo & Patrick Ochieng Odipo

Date Delivered:

23 Oct 2020

Case Class:

Civil

Court:

High Court at Kisumu

Case Action:

Ruling

Judge(s):

Thripsisa Wanjiku Cherere

Citation:

Bedrock Holdings Limited v Bedrock Security Services Limited & 2 others [2020] eKLR

Advocates:

For Applicant - Mr. Otieno for Owiti, Otieno & Ragot Advocate

For Respondent - Mr. Mwamu for Mwamu & Co. Advocates

Court Division:

Civil

County:

Kisumu

Advocates:

For Applicant - Mr. Otieno for Owiti, Otieno & Ragot Advocate

For Respondent - Mr. Mwamu for Mwamu & Co. Advocates

History Advocates:

Both Parties Represented

Case Outcome:

Chamber summons dismissed.

Disclaimer:

The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU

(CORAM: CHERERE-J)

CIVIL SUIT NO.134 OF 2009

BEDROCK HOLDINGS LIMITED.........................PLAINTIFF/ APPLICANT

VERSUS

BEDROCK SECURITY SERVICES LIMITED...................1

ST

RESPONDENT

ERICK OUMA OKEYO..........................................................2

ND

RESPONDENT

PATRICK OCHIENG ODIPO................................................3

RD

RESPONDENT

RULING

1. The Plaintiff/Applicant’s suit was on 01.08.19 dismissed with

costs to the Respondents.

2. By Chamber Summons dated 24.08.2020 the Applicant prays for stay of execution of taxed costs pending the hearing and determination of a reference and appeal.

3. Mr. David Otieno, advocate for the Respondents in his replying affidavit sworn on 09.09.2020 opposes the application on the ground that no appeal has been filed and that a reference is no bar to execution.

4. I have carefully considered the reference in the light of the affidavits on record.

5. The substantive law of access for the relief sought is Order 42 (6) of the Civil Procedure Rules which provides:

(2) No order for stay of execution shall be made under sub rule

(1) Unless—

a. The court is satisfied that substantial loss may result to the applicant unless the order is made

b. That the application has been made without unreasonable delay; and

c. Such security as the court orders for the due performance of such decree or order as may ultimately be binding on him

has been given by the applicant.

6. Substantial loss, in its various forms is the corner stone of best jurisdictions for granting a stay and the party seeking stay bears a

specific burden regarding proof of substantial loss. (See

Rhoda Mukuma

v John Abuoga[1988] eKLR

).

7. The reference relating to the taxed costs was dismissed by an order dated 21.10.2020. The Plaintiff/Applicant has not alleged or demonstrated that the Defendants/Respondents would be unable to adequately refund the taxed costs should the intended appeal ultimately succeed.

8. Consequently, the Chamber Summons dated 12.06.2020 is without merit and it is dismissed.

DATED AT KISUMU THIS

23

rd

DAY OF

October

2020

T. W. CHERERE

JUDGE

Court Assistants -

Ms. Amondi/Ms. Okodoi

For Applicant -

Mr. Otieno for Owiti, Otieno & Ragot Advocate

For Respondent -

Mr. Mwamu for Mwamu & Co. Advocates