Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedAppeal No E023 of 2023· [2024] KEELRC 144 (KLR)

Victonell Academy Ltd v Mwangi (Appeal E023 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 144 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
8 February 2024
2,111 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 Employment Court in Nakuru paused execution of a Kshs.372,358 judgment, but only because the appellant agreed to deposit that sum in a joint interest-earning account.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru (David Nderitu, J) delivered on 8th February 2024 on a notice of motion dated 15th September 2023. The appellant, the unsuccessful respondent in Nakuru CMCC (ELRC) No. E91 of 2022 before P. Nyotah SRM, sought a stay of execution of the magistrate's court judgment of 26th July 2023, in which the claimant (the respondent here) was awarded Kshs.281,358/= plus costs and interest, pending the hearing of an appeal already filed. The application was brought under Rules 3, 8 and 17 of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules 2016 and opposed through a replying affidavit. The court framed a single issue: whether the appellant deserved a stay and on what terms. It identified Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules as the applicable law (substantial loss, no unreasonable delay, security) but held, invoking Order 42 Rule 6(6), that it retained a wider discretion in the interest of justice, permitting consideration of triable issues, nugatory appeal, the decree-holder's ability to repay and wider interests of justice. The court found the application timely but held that substantial loss was not demonstrated, the allegation that the respondent could not repay having been made only from the bar. It nonetheless allowed the application on terms: the decretal sum plus costs of Kshs.372,358/= was to be deposited in a joint interest-earning account in the names of both law firms within 30 days, failing which the stay would lapse; the appellant to pay auctioneer's charges; and costs of the application to abide the appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the appellant satisfied the conditions for stay of execution under Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules

Holding

The application was filed without undue delay, but substantial loss was not demonstrated because there was no sworn allegation that the respondent would be unable to repay the decretal sum if the appeal succeeded; the court nonetheless exercised its discretion to grant a conditional stay.

Reasoning

The court reproduced the three conditions in Order 42 Rule 6(2): substantial loss, no unreasonable delay, and security. While delay was not an issue, the claim of substantial loss rested only on submissions from the bar, depriving the respondent of a chance to respond with evidence on her financial position. Invoking Order 42 Rule 6(6), the court held it retained a wider interest-of-justice discretion and secured the decretal sum as a conditional stay.

p. 4
02

Whether the court may consider factors beyond the three statutory conditions, such as triable issues and the appeal being rendered nugatory

Holding

Yes - Order 42 Rule 6(6) vests a discretion to grant stay in the interest of justice beyond the conditions in Order 42 Rule 6(2).

Reasoning

The court held that Order 42 Rule 6(6), which empowers the High Court (ELRC) in its appellate jurisdiction to grant a temporary injunction where the procedure for appealing has been complied with, allows stay to be granted in the interest of justice. This explains why courts consider triable issues, nugatory appeals, the decree-holder's ability to repay, and wider interests of justice on a case-by-case basis.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Beyond the three conditions in Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the ELRC in its appellate jurisdiction retains a wider discretion to grant stay of execution in the interest of justice, taking into account factors such as triable issues, whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory, the decree-holder's ability to repay, and the wider interests of justice.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Stay of execution granted pending the hearing and determination of the appeal
  2. 2.The entire decretal sum plus costs of Kshs.372,358/= to be deposited in a joint interest earning account in the name of both law-firms within 30 days of the ruling
  3. 3.In default of the deposit, the stay of execution shall automatically lapse
  4. 4.The appellant shall pay auctioneer's charges for work done, which may be agreed or assessed/taxed in the usual manner
  5. 5.Costs of the application shall be in the appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016Rules 3, 8 and 17
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 Rule 6(2)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 Rule 6(6)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159
  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A and 1B
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court ActSection 3

Cases cited (8)

  • Mukuma v Abuoga
    (1988) KLR 645
  • National Industrial Credit Bank Ltd v Aquinas Francis Wasike & Another
    (2006) KLR
  • Josephine Koki Raymond v Philomena Kanini Maingi & Another
    (2018) eKLR
  • Royal Media Services Limited v Veronica Chepkemoi
    (2015) eKLR
  • Butt v Rent Restriction Tribunal
  • Reliance Bank Ltd v Norlake Investments Ltd
    (2002) KLR
  • Daniel Maina Wanyoike v Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited
    (2015) eKLR
  • Cosmas Kipkoech Sigei v Madrugada Ltd & Another
    (2010) eKLR
On appeal from
Magistrate's Court (Nakuru CMCC (ELRC))
Nakuru CMCC (ELRC) No. E91 of 2022
Jurisdiction invoked
Appellate jurisdiction of the ELRC under Order 42 Rule 6(6) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules 2016 (Rules 3, 8 and 17), Article 159 of the Constitution, Sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act and Section 3 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Victonell Academy Ltd v Mwangi (Appeal E023 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 144 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Appeal No E023 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/144/eng@2024-02-08

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