Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedNot stated in the judgment (ELRC Nakuru, stay application arising from judgment delivered 4th May 2023)· [2024] KEELRC 5 (KLR)

Turgut v Nakuru Water & Sanitation Services Co Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E062 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 5 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
23 January 2024
3,415 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~14 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan employment court paused an employer's KES 6.4 million judgment debt because it lodged its appeal on time and agreed to deposit the money while the appeal proceeds.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru (Hellen Wasilwa, J) on the Respondent/Applicant's Notice of Motion dated 26th October 2023 seeking stay of execution of the judgment and consequential decree delivered on 4th May 2023, by which the Claimant was awarded Kshs 4,193,833 for unfair termination. Costs were later taxed at Kshs 299,482 on 24th October 2023, and probate gratuity of Kshs 1,798,000 had been added on 14th June 2023, bringing the total decretal sum to about Kshs 6,428,481. The Applicant, who had filed an appeal pending before the Court of Appeal (Nakuru Civil Appeal No. E084 of 2023), argued it would suffer substantial loss and that its appeal would be rendered nugatory if execution proceeded. The Claimant opposed, contending the Notice of Appeal was filed out of time (20 days after judgment), that no decree had been extracted, and that the Applicant had not offered security. The court first resolved the threshold issue of the validity of the Notice of Appeal, finding on the record that it was filed on 9th May 2023, within a reasonable period, so the appeal was properly before the court. Applying Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court held the Applicant had satisfied the conditions of substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay, and security, and would suffer irreparable harm if stay were refused. It allowed the stay of execution on condition that the decretal sum be deposited in an interest-earning account in the joint names of counsel on record within 60 days, failing which execution may proceed. The ruling was delivered virtually on 23rd January 2024. No separate costs order appears in the final orders.

Key legal issues

#
01

Timeliness and validity of the Notice of Appeal

Holding

The Notice of Appeal was filed within time, so the appeal is properly before the court and stay jurisdiction is not defeated.

Reasoning

The Respondent alleged the Notice of Appeal was filed 20 days after judgment, outside the 14 days under Rule 75 of the Court of Appeal Rules, and that without a proper notice the court could not invoke Order 42 Rule 6. The Applicant contended it was filed within days of judgment. The court accepted the Applicant's position, holding the notice was lodged within a reasonable period and the appeal was properly before the court, clearing the jurisdictional obstacle.

p. 6
02

Whether the conditions in Order 42 Rule 6(2) for stay of execution were met

Holding

The court found the twin conditions of substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay and security satisfied and granted a conditional stay.

Reasoning

The court reproduced Order 42 Rule 6(2) requiring satisfaction that substantial loss may result, that the application was made without unreasonable delay, and that security for due performance has been given. It found the applicants had certified these conditions and would suffer irreparable harm if stay were denied. It granted stay conditioned on deposit of the decretal sum in a joint interest-earning account within 60 days, with execution to proceed in default.

p. 7

Legal principles established

#
  • The court retains discretion to grant stay of execution pending appeal where the Order 42 Rule 6(2) conditions are satisfied, even where the intended appeal is pending before the Court of Appeal.
  • Stay granted under Order 42 Rule 6(2) may be conditioned on deposit of the decretal sum in an interest-earning joint account within a fixed period, with execution proceeding in default.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Stay of execution of the judgment and consequential decree delivered on 4th May 2023 granted pending appeal, on condition that the decretal sum is deposited in an interest-earning account held in the joint names of counsels on record within 60 days
  2. 2.In default of the deposit, execution may proceed

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Actsections 1, 1A, 3, 3A
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 42 Rule 6 (incl. rule 6(1) and 6(2))
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010Order 51 Rule 1
  • Constitution of KenyaArticles 27, 43, 45, 46, 47, 50
  • Court of Appeal Rules, 2022Rules 75, 77(2), 79(1)

Cases cited (13)

  • Desbro (Kenya) Limited v General Printers Limited; NCBA Bank Kenya PLC & another (Objectors)
    [2021] eKLR
  • Tropical Commodities Suppliers Ltd vs International Credit Bank (in Liquidation), Kampala Miscellaneous Application No. 379 of 2003
  • Bashir Godana v Fatuma Godana Tupi
    [2018] eKLR
  • Absalom Dora vs Turbo Transporters
    (2013) eKLR
  • Susan Wanjiru & another v Lucy Gathoni & another
    [2015] eKLR
  • David Kihara Murage v Jacinta Karuana Nyangi & another
    [2015] eKLR
  • John N. Liboyi vs. The Board of Governors of St. John College
    Civil Application No. Nai. 13 of 2009 (UR 92/2009)
  • Ruben & 9 Others vs. Nderitu & Another
    [1989] KLR 459
  • James Ndungu Gethenji & 3 others v Gitahi Gethenji & 3 others
    [2018] eKLR
  • Keystone Bank Limited & 4 others Vs I&M Holdings Limited & another
    [2017] eKLR
  • James Wangalwa & Another v Agnes Naliaka Cheseto
    [2012] eKLR
  • RWW v EKW
    [2019] eKLR
  • Gianfranco Manenthi & Another v Africa Merchant Assurance Co. Ltd
    [2019] eKLR
On appeal from
Court of Appeal
Nakuru Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. E084 of 2023 (pending)
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010; sections 1, 1A, 3, 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 51 Rule 1; Articles 27, 43, 45, 46, 47 and 50 of the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Turgut v Nakuru Water & Sanitation Services Co Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E062 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 5 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment (ELRC Nakuru, stay application arising from judgment delivered 4th May 2023). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/5/eng@2024-01-23

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