RULING
On 12th August 2014, the applicant, being aggrieved by the decision of the High Court, (Odunga, J.) rendered on 14th July, 2014, filed a Notice of Motion under certificate of urgency for orders of injunction and stay of execution under Rule 5 (2) (b) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
The application was placed before me for a certificate that it is urgent and therefore ought to be heard without delay.
Upon considering the affidavit in support of the certificate of urgency, I formed the opinion that it did not disclose any urgency and declined to certify the application urgent.
Hassan N. Lakicha and Company Advocates, representing the applicant, pursuant to the provisions of Rule 47 (5) of the Court’s Rules has informally, by a letter dated 25th September, 2014, applied to have the issue of urgency heard inter partes.
Rule 47 (5) aforesaid, is designed to give the Judge another opportunity having heard both sides to reconsider his or her decision to reject the certificate of urgency.
In s…