Kenya Medical Research Institute v Muthoni & 34 others & another
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal paused KEMRI's back-pay obligations but let the reinstated employees keep their jobs while the appeal continues.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Twin principles for stay under rule 5(2)(b)
Applicant must show an arguable appeal and that the appeal will be rendered nugatory unless stay is granted; both conditions must be satisfied
The court restated the established test: an arguable appeal is one that is not frivolous and raises at least one issue deserving consideration, and the nugatory aspect concerns ensuring that what the appeal seeks to forestall does not irreversibly happen in the interim. Both limbs must be met before stay issues.
Arguability of the intended appeal
The intended appeal was arguable on the questions whether reinstatement is available after 11 years and whether the applicant was denied a fair hearing
The court found the issue whether the remedy of reinstatement remains available after the lapse of 11 years clearly arguable, as was the complaint that the trial court failed to consider the applicant's replying affidavit and submissions on record. One arguable issue sufficed.
Nugatory value as to back pay and the Kshs.200,000
Stay granted in respect of back wages and the Kshs.200,000 because the amount was substantial, unimplemented and possibly unrecoverable, and unrebutted
The 1st respondent conceded the back pay order had not been implemented. The applicant's assertion that the amount was substantial and might be irrecoverable was not addressed or rebutted by the respondents, so the nugatory condition was satisfied for the monetary orders.
Legal principles established
#- A pending stay application in the trial court does not deprive the Court of Appeal of jurisdiction under rule 5(2)(b) so long as a notice of appeal is on record
- An arguable appeal need not raise a multiplicity of issues; one bona fide issue suffices
- Rule 5(2)(b) confers an independent original discretion to be exercised de novo, not an appeal from the judge's discretion
Court orders
#- 1.Order of stay of execution of the ruling and orders of the Employment and Labour Relations Court dated 14th October 2021, except as regards reinstatement of the 1st respondent, which has already been implemented
- 2.Stay of execution relates to tabulation and payment of back wages as well as payment of Kshs.200,000 and accrued interest to the 1st respondent's advocates
- 3.Costs shall abide the outcome of the appeal
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- ELRCC No. 37 (N of 2010)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules (application for stay of execution, injunction or stay of proceedings pending appeal)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Medical Research Institute v Muthoni & 34 others & another", Case Analysis (2022). Civil Application E374 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2022/873/eng@2022-07-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.