LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Stay of Execution – Nature of Remedy – Equitable Considerations
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
It is not a relief that is granted as a matter of course, being essentially an equitable remedy that must take into consideration the right of a successful party to harvest the fruits of its success in the suit, on the one hand, and the necessity not to impede the appellant's right to appeal as well as preserving the res so that if the appeal is successful the proceedings are not rendered futile.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Achike, JSC, in Momah v. VAB Petroleum Inc. (2000) NLC-1831995(SC) at p. 18; Paras D–E.
"It is not a relief that is granted as a matter of course, being essentially an equitable remedy that must take into consideration the right of a successful party to harvest the fruits of its success in the suit, on the one hand, and the necessity not to impede the appellant's right to appeal as well as preserving the res so that if the appeal is successful the proceedings are not rendered futile."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Stay of execution is an equitable remedy, not automatic. Courts balance competing interests: the judgment creditor’s right to enjoy fruits of success versus the appellant’s right to appeal and need to preserve the res from destruction. Equity requires fairness to both sides. The remedy is discretionary, exercised judicially based on circumstances. No party has an absolute right to stay. The court considers whether refusal would render appeal nugatory, but this alone does not automatically entitle applicant. Equitable principles guide the exercise, ensuring justice between the parties.