Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedCause No 64 of 2013· [2018] KEELRC 1015 (KLR)

Jelic Munyasya v Bricks Security Services Limited [2018] KEELRC 1015 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
1 October 2018
HWHellen Wasilwa
1,974 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

#

A Kenyan employer who deposited the disputed costs in court won both a stay of execution and extra time to challenge the taxed award.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Applicant (a party ordered to pay costs in an employment dispute) moved the court by notice of motion dated 21st May, 2018 seeking stay of execution of the decree, certificate of costs and warrants of attachment dated 9th May, 2018, and enlargement of time to file a reference against the taxing master's ruling of 15th February, 2018 delivered by Hon. W. Ngumi, which allowed Kshs. 88,782 as taxed costs. The Applicant explained that counsel learned of the ruling only when auctioneers proclaimed its property on 16th May, 2018, alleging the ruling had been delivered in its absence without proper notice. The Claimant/Respondent opposed, asserting the Applicant was duly notified of the ruling date, that the perusal note was unauthenticated, and that the requirements for stay under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules were not met, citing Labh Singh Harman Singh Ltd. The Applicant relied on Mumias Sugar Company Limited vs Tom Ojienda & Associates on delay caused by advocate's inadvertence, and argued the taxed costs exceeded the judgment award of Kshs. 66,500. The court noted the Applicant had complied with an interim stay condition by depositing the decretal sum of Kshs. 164,881 in court. It confirmed the interim stay pending further orders, found no irreparable injustice to the Respondent, and enlarged time by 15 days from 1st October, 2018 to file the reference, with costs in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether stay of execution of the decree and certificate of costs should be granted pending the intended reference

Holding

Stay was confirmed as the Applicant had complied with the condition of depositing the decretal sum of Kshs.164,881/= in court.

Reasoning

The court noted an interim stay had been granted on 24/5/2018 conditional on deposit of the decretal sum, which the Applicant complied with. Having satisfied the condition, the court found the interim stay should be confirmed pending further orders, and that the Respondent would not suffer irreparable injustice by waiting a little longer.

p. 3
02

Whether time should be enlarged to file a reference against the taxing master's ruling of 15th February, 2018

Holding

The court exercised its discretion and allowed extension of time by 15 days from the date of the ruling.

Reasoning

The court took the Applicant's deposit of the decretal sum in court as a plausible indication of good intention, and found the Respondent would not suffer irreparable injustice if the reference were allowed to be filed late. Time was enlarged by 15 days, failing which the application would be spent.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A party who complies with conditions attached to an interim stay, such as depositing the decretal sum in court, demonstrates good intention and merits confirmation of the stay.
  • A party's compliance with a court order as a prerequisite for stay constitutes a plausible reason justifying enlargement of time to file a reference.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The interim stay order granted on 24/5/2018 is confirmed pending further orders of the Court
  2. 2.Time is enlarged by 15 days from the date of the ruling for the Applicant to file the Reference
  3. 3.In default of filing the Reference within 15 days, the application will be considered spent
  4. 4.Costs in the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 Rule 6
  • Advocates Remuneration Order2009

Cases cited (2)

  • Mumias Sugar Company Limited vs Tom Ojienda & Associates
    (2018) eKLR
  • Labh Singh Harman Singh Ltd Vs. Honourable Attorney General & 2 Others
    (2016) eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent discretion of the Court to enlarge time and grant stay of execution pending reference against a taxing master's decision

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Jelic Munyasya v Bricks Security Services Limited [2018] KEELRC 1015 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Cause No 64 of 2013. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/1015/eng@2018-10-01

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