AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealOtherCivil Application No. NAI. 435 of 2001 (UR.232/2001)
Delphis Bank Limited (Under Statutory Management) v Surjit Singh & 2 others [2002] KECA 223 (KLR)
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min briefThe bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal adjourned Delphis Bank's application to pause a High Court ruling against it, deciding nothing on the merits.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#This is a short procedural order of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi in Civil Application No. NAI. 435 of 2001 (UR.232/2001), an application by The Delphis Bank Limited (under statutory management) for an injunction and/or a stay of the orders of the High Court (Justice Tom Mbaluto, given on 30th October 2001 in Milimani High Court Civil Case No. 566 of 1999) pending the lodging, hearing and determination of an intended appeal. The respondents were Surjit Singh, Malkiat Singh and Miwani Sugar Company (1989) Limited (in receivership). The document records no substantive hearing or determination of the application. Counsel for the applicant, Mr. Regeru, requested an adjournment, and counsel for the respondents, Mr. Ngaira, did not object. The court accordingly stood the application over generally with liberty to apply, and reserved the costs of that day. The order was made at Nairobi on 6th June 2002 by a coram of Kwach, Lakha and Bosire, JJ.A., and is signed by R.O. Kwach, Judge of Appeal. Because the application was adjourned rather than decided, the order establishes no binding legal proposition, makes no findings on the merits, and does not disturb the decision of the High Court. The intended appeal and the fate of the injunction/stay application remain unresolved on the face of this record.
Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the application for an injunction and/or stay of the High Court orders pending an intended appeal should proceed or be adjourned
Key legal issues
#Legal principles established
#Court orders
#- 1.The application is stood over generally with liberty to apply
- 2.Today's costs are reserved
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- Milimani High Court Civil Case No. 566 of 1999
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent/appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over an intended appeal from the High Court (application for injunction and/or stay pending appeal); no specific constitutional or statutory provision is cited in the order.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
At Mr. Regeru's request to adjourn this application and Mr. Ngaira not objecting, this application is stood over generally with liberty to apply. Today's costs are reserved.
Issues in the judgment
#minor
The document is a brief procedural order, not a reasoned judgment; it contains no holdings, no questions for determination beyond the adjournment, and no citation of authorities, limiting the analytical value of this record.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Delphis Bank Limited (Under Statutory Management) v Surjit Singh & 2 others [2002] KECA 223 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2002). Civil Application No. NAI. 435 of 2001 (UR.232/2001). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2002/223/eng@2002-06-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.