Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedPetition No E021 of 2021· [2021] KEELRC 1379 (KLR)

Elizabeth Alila Ochaye v County Government of Migori & another [2021] KEELRC 1379 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
1 July 2021
RSRadido Stephen
1,282 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled that a 'status quo' order lets ongoing disciplinary processes continue — it is not an injunction stopping them.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicant, formerly a County Executive Committee member for Trade, Tourism and Co-Operatives in Migori County (later moved to Environment, Natural Resources and Disaster Management), was issued a show-cause notice on 5 March 2021, reassigned to a Department without Portfolio, and had her medical cover removed. A Special Disciplinary Committee invited her to a hearing on 9 April 2021. On 7 April 2021 she moved the Court seeking interdicts; on 8 April 2021 the Court directed that the application and Petition be disposed of by written submissions and, in the meantime, that the status quo as of 8 April 2021 be maintained. The Respondents filed grounds of opposition and a Motion to expunge documents allegedly obtained illegally. The applicant then filed a Motion to cite the Governor for contempt, alleging that despite the status quo order her appointment had been terminated by letter dated 13 April 2021. The sole question was what the status quo on 8 April 2021 was. The applicant, citing Shimmers Plaza Ltd v National Bank of Kenya Ltd, argued the order froze the disciplinary process and termination. The Respondents, citing Baobab Beach Resort, contended a status quo order differs from an injunction and merely preserves the existing situation. The Court held that the situation on 8 April 2021 was ongoing disciplinary proceedings, so maintaining status quo allowed them to proceed; had it intended to interdict the process it would have issued restraining orders or ordered status quo ante. The essentials of contempt were therefore not proved, the Motion dated 22 April 2021 was dismissed, with costs in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Meaning and effect of an order of status quo

Holding

Status quo means the existing state of circumstances as at the date of the order; it is an order to maintain the existing situation and binds both parties not to alter it, but it is distinct from an injunction

Reasoning

The Court accepted that status quo orders are open to differing interpretations causing confusion. It adopted the understanding that status quo refers to the situation existing on the date of the order. Here, disciplinary proceedings were ongoing when the order issued, so maintaining status quo meant allowing them to continue; had the Court wished to halt them it would have granted the restraining orders sought or ordered status quo ante.

p. 3
02

Whether contempt of court was established against the Governor

Holding

The essentials of contempt were not proved because the termination did not breach the status quo order as properly construed

Reasoning

The applicant read the status quo order as injuncting the disciplinary process and termination, relying on Shimmers Plaza. The Respondents read it as permitting continuation of the process, relying on Baobab Beach Resort. The Court held the situation on 8 April 2021 was ongoing disciplinary proceedings, so the order did not bar their continuation or the termination, and contempt could not be made out.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A status quo order preserves the situation existing at the date of the order; it is not an injunction and does not freeze ongoing processes unless the order says so or status quo ante is ordered
  • Where a court intends to halt an ongoing process, it must issue restraining orders or order status quo ante; a bare status quo order allows the existing process to continue

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Motion dated 22 April 2021 (contempt application) is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs in the cause

Authorities

#

Cases cited (2)

  • Shimmers Plaza Ltd v National Bank of Kenya Ltd
    (2015)
  • Baobab Beach Resort
    Mombasa High Court Misc Civil Cause No. 11 of 2012
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment dispute; no specific constitutional provision cited in extract

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Elizabeth Alila Ochaye v County Government of Migori & another [2021] KEELRC 1379 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Petition No E021 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/1379/eng@2021-07-01

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