MBARAKI BULK TERMINAL LTD v EAST AFRICAN BULKING SERVICES LTD & 2 others [2007] KECA 51 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal refused to pause the High Court's December 2006 order against Mbaraki Bulk Terminal, meaning the High Court decision now takes effect.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether a stay of execution of the ruling and order of the High Court (Sergon J.) dated 15th December 2006 should be granted
Key legal issues
#Legal principles established
#- The Court of Appeal dismissed the application for stay of execution of the High Court ruling and order of 15th December 2006, and that dismissal with costs binds the parties and courts below. The substantive reasons reside in the ruling of Bosire JA, which is not reproduced in the material supplied.
Court orders
#- 1.The consolidated application (Civil Appli. Nai 4 & 5 of 2007) was dismissed
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
Deverell JA concurred with the decision to dismiss the consolidated application with costs, adopting the reasons given by Bosire JA.
I concur with the decision to dismiss the consolidated application with costs for the reasons given by the Hon. Mr. Justice Bosire, JA.p. 1
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Mombasa
- H.C. Miscellaneous Civil Appl. No. 946 of 2005
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over applications for stay of execution of High Court orders (the judgment text does not state the enabling provision)
- Consolidated with
- Civil Appli. Nai 4 of 2007, Civil Appli. Nai 5 of 2007
Relief refused
#Stay of execution of the High Court ruling and order of 15th December 2006
The consolidated application was dismissed, so the stay sought was refused
Costs
The consolidated application was dismissed with costs (costs awarded against the applicant).
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.
I concur with the decision to dismiss the consolidated application with costs for the reasons given by the Hon. Mr. Justice Bosire, JA.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this16th day of March, 2007.
Issues in the judgment
#The document supplied contains only the concurring ruling of Deverell JA. The main ruling of Bosire JA, whose reasons the court adopted, and the ruling of Githinji JA, are not included, so the substantive reasoning for refusing the stay cannot be quoted.
The coram listing shows Bosire and Githinji by surname only; the record does not print their given names or initials, so their names are recorded as printed.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "MBARAKI BULK TERMINAL LTD v EAST AFRICAN BULKING SERVICES LTD & 2 others [2007] KECA 51 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2007). Civil Appli. Nai 4 & 5 of 2007 (Consolidated). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2007/51/eng@2007-03-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.