County Government of Laikipia & 1 other v Patrick Kariithi Wahome & 114 Others
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal paused a KES employment judgment ordering reinstatement and pay for 115 former county workers until their appeal is decided.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicants had an arguable appeal
The court was satisfied the appeal was arguable, particularly on whether the respondents were rightful employees of the first applicant, without making definitive findings.
The court perused the annexed memorandum of appeal and found the appeal arguable and worthy of consideration, especially on the question whether the respondents were rightful employees. It deliberately refrained from further comment to avoid embarrassing the bench that would eventually hear the appeal, consistent with the settled principle that no definitive findings of fact or law are made at the stay stage.
Whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory if stay was not granted
Payment of the disputed emoluments to the 115 respondents would amount to loss of public funds, as the respondents may not be able to refund if the appeal succeeds.
The court reasoned that if the 115 respondents were paid the disputed salaries and the appeal later succeeded, recovery would be doubtful because their sources and means of income were unknown. Loss of public funds on irrecoverable payments would render the intended appeal nugatory, satisfying the second limb of the rule 5(2)(b) test.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant under rule 5(2)(b) must satisfy the twin principles of an arguable appeal and that the appeal would be rendered nugatory absent stay.
- The discretion under rule 5(2)(b) is wide and unfettered provided it is just to do so, and the applicant must satisfy both twin principles.
Court orders
#- 1.Stay of execution of the judgment and all consequential orders of the Employment and Labour Relations Court in Nakuru ELRC Cause No 382 of 2013 dated October 21, 2021 pending the lodging, hearing and determination of the intended appeal, granted in terms of prayer 4 of the motion
- 2.Costs of the motion to abide the outcome of the intended appeal
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Nakuru ELRC Cause No 382 of 2013
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 3, 3A and 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Cap 9 and rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "County Government of Laikipia & 1 other v Patrick Kariithi Wahome & 114 Others", Case Analysis (2023). Nakuru Civil Application No. of 2021 (Motion dated December 9, 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2023/215/eng@2023-03-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.