Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealDismissedCivil Application No. E094 of 2022 (Nakuru)· [2023] KECA 216 (KLR)

Kenya National Union of Nurses v Biiy (Civil Application E052 of 2022) [2023] KECA 216 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
3 March 2023
2,033 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Court of Appeal refused to pause a judgment against the nurses' union because money parked in a joint account hurts no one, so the appeal can proceed safely.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicant union moved the Court of Appeal at Nakuru under rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules seeking an unconditional stay of execution of a judgment of the Employment & Labour Relations Court at Kericho delivered on April 22, 2022, and a stay of the part of the ruling of July 27, 2022 directing it to deposit the entire decretal sum in a joint interest-earning account operated by both parties' advocates within 30 days. The union argued unique circumstances justified unconditional stay: it holds a decree against the respondent in a separate ELRC matter (Nairobi ELRC Cause No. 50 of 2018) for diverted funds of about Kshs 10 million, the respondent has no traceable assets, and compliance with the deposit condition was impossible due to financial difficulties. The respondent opposed, contending the alleged debt was not pleaded in the underlying Kericho suit and that no substantial loss was established. Applying the settled rule 5(2)(b) thresholds, the Court accepted that the intended appeal was arguable - particularly the ground that the trial court determined unpleaded issues - but held the appeal would not be rendered nugatory, since money deposited in a joint account remains inaccessible to the respondent until the appeal is determined, so no irreparable loss arises. The Nzyuko authority relied on by the applicant was distinguished. The alleged debt in the separate suit was not canvassed below and could not serve as security. The application was dismissed with costs to abide the intended appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the intended appeal is arguable

Holding

The intended appeal is arguable, since one of the applicant's grounds - that the trial court determined issues that were not pleaded - is bona fide arguable

Reasoning

The Court applied the settled standard that an arguable appeal need not necessarily succeed; it is sufficient that a single bona fide arguable ground is raised. Reading the draft memorandum of appeal, the Court identified the plea that the trial court determined unpleaded issues as an arguable element, while deliberately avoiding deeper engagement to not embarrass the appeal panel.

p. 3
02

Whether the appeal will be rendered nugatory if stay is not granted

Holding

The appeal will not be rendered nugatory because compliance with the conditional deposit order causes no irreparable loss to the applicant

Reasoning

The Court reasoned that a deposit into a joint interest-earning account is reversible in effect: the money remains inaccessible to the respondent until the appeal is determined. Damages or refund remain possible, so the applicant suffers no irreparable loss. The authority relied on by the applicant (Nzyuko) was distinguished because there the judgment debtor's ability to refund was in doubt, which is not the position here.

p. 4
03

Whether the respondent's alleged indebtedness under a decree in a separate suit can stand as security

Holding

No. The alleged debt was not canvassed before the trial court and the two matters are unrelated

Reasoning

The Court declined to delve into the alleged decree in ELRC No. 50 of 2018, noting those facts were not pleaded or litigated in the Kericho matter underlying this application. Even if the debt exists, the applicant may recover it through other legal means, and it cannot substitute for security in this application.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • An applicant under rule 5(2)(b) must establish both an arguable appeal and that the appeal will be rendered nugatory absent a stay
  • Compliance with an order to deposit a decretal sum in a joint interest-earning account does not render an appeal nugatory because the funds are inaccessible to either party without the other's consent

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated August 23, 2022 is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the application to abide the final determination of the intended appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Appellate Jurisdiction Actsections 3, 3A & 3B
  • Court of Appeal Rulesrules 1(2), 5(2)(b), 41, 42 and 43(1)
  • Civil Procedure Actsection 66

Cases cited (6)

  • Bernard Mbalu Nzvuko/Nzyuko v Joseph Mwangi Kimani & another
    [2021] eKLR
  • Stanley Mugweru Muchira & 2 others v John Muthike Muchira
    [2020] eKLR
  • Attorney General & another v Eunice Makori & another
    [2021] eKLR
  • Multimedia University & another v Professor Gitile N Naituli
    (2014) eKLR
  • Stanley Kangethe Kinyanjui v Tony Ketter & 5 others
    [2013] eKLR
  • Permanent Secretary Ministry of Roads & another v Fleur Investments Limited
    [2014] eKLR
On appeal from
Employment & Labour Relations Court at Kericho
ELRC No. 13 of 2020
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, together with sections 3, 3A & 3B of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and section 66 of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya National Union of Nurses v Biiy (Civil Application E052 of 2022) [2023] KECA 216 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Civil Application No. E094 of 2022 (Nakuru). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2023/216/eng@2023-03-03

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.