Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNotice of Motion dated 2nd November, 2023 in Employment & Labour Relations Court Cause· [2024] KEELRC 2177 (KLR)

Mwangi v Family Bank Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 331 of 2014) [2024] KEELRC 2177 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
4 July 2024
1,934 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 employment court allowed an employer to delay paying an award, but only if it paid half upfront and secured the balance within 30 days.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Following a judgment of the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru finding the claimant's dismissal wrongful, unfair and unlawful and awarding her Kshs 2,875,500/= with declarations restraining realization of charged properties and negative reporting, the respondent filed a notice of motion dated 2nd November 2023 seeking stay of execution pending an intended appeal to the Court of Appeal, invoking Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The application was supported by the affidavit of the respondent's human resource manager, Stephen Kimani Ngaru, who deponed that the decretal sum was substantial, that the claimant could not refund it if the appeal succeeded, that the application was made timeously, and that security was offered. The claimant opposed, deposing that the application was an abuse of process, that she was a financially stable business owner, and that any stay should be conditional on deposit of the entire decretal sum. Only the respondent filed submissions, citing authorities on substantial loss, ability to repay, and security. The court, applying Order 42 Rule 6(2) and the Court of Appeal's decision in Absalom Dova v Tarbo Transporters, observed that stay balances the appellant's right of appeal against the decree-holder's right to enjoy the decree. Noting that the notice of appeal was filed four days after judgment and that the respondent offered security, the court allowed the application on terms: the respondent to pay Kshs 1,500,000/= and deposit the balance of Kshs 1,375,000/= in a joint interest-earning account within 30 days, failing which the stay lapses automatically. Costs of the application were reserved to the appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal under Order 42 Rule 6(2)

Holding

The court has discretion to grant stay where substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay, and security for due performance are considered; here notice of appeal was filed four days after judgment and security was offered, so the application was allowed on terms.

Reasoning

Order 42 Rule 6(2) requires satisfaction that substantial loss may result unless stay is granted, that the application was made without unreasonable delay, and that security for due performance is given. The notice of appeal was filed four days after judgment, and the application followed within roughly a month, showing no unreasonable delay. The respondent offered security by way of a deposit in a joint interest-earning account. Weighing the appellant's right of appeal against the decree-holder's rights under Absalom Dova, the court granted conditional stay requiring partial payment and deposit of the balance.

p. 4
02

Balancing the parties' competing rights in a stay application

Holding

Stay is designed so no party is worse off; the court reconciles the appellant's right of appeal with the decree-holder's right to the benefits of the decree.

Reasoning

Applying Absalom Dova v Tarbo Transporters, the court held that a stay order should introduce no disadvantage to either side. The respondent's right to pursue its appeal and the prospect that it not be rendered nugatory must be weighed against the claimant's entitlement to enjoy the fruits of the judgment. The court achieved this by allowing stay conditionally: part payment of Kshs 1,500,000 and deposit of the balance in a joint interest-earning account, with the stay lapsing automatically upon default.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Stay of execution pending appeal is discretionary relief balancing the appellant's right to a meaningful appeal against the decree-holder's right to the fruits of the decree.
  • An application for stay of execution made promptly after judgment, with an offer of security, may properly be allowed in the interest of justice.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Stay of execution of the judgment be and is hereby granted pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal
  2. 2.The respondent shall within 30 days of the ruling pay a sum of Kshs 1,500,000/= to the claimant
  3. 3.The respondent shall within 30 days deposit the balance of Kshs 1,375,000/= in a joint interest-earning account to be opened in the joint names of the law firms for both parties in a different but reputable financial banking institution other than the respondent
  4. 4.In default of payment and deposit, the stay of execution shall automatically lapse
  5. 5.Costs of the application shall be in the appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159
  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A, 1B & 3A
  • Employment & Labour Relations Court ActSection 3
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 Rule 6(2); Order 51
  • Court of Appeal RulesRule 77

Cases cited (12)

  • Kiambu Transport v Kenya Breweries
  • Mukuma v Abuoga
    (1988) KLR 645
  • Tropical Commodities Suppliers Ltd & others v International Credit Bank Ltd
    Misc Application No 379/2003
  • Antoine Ndiaye v African Virtual University
    [2015] eKLR
  • Daniel Chebutul Rotich & 2 others v Emirates Airlines
    Civil Case No 368 of 2001
  • ABN Amro Bank v Le Monde Foods Ltd
    Application No 15 of 2002
  • National Industrial Credit Bank Ltd v Aquinas Francis Wasike & another
    Civil Application No 238 of 2005 (UR 144/2005)
  • Alhyder Trading Company Ltd v Lucy Jepngetich Mibei
    (2016) eKLR
  • Vista Holdings International Limited v Span Image (K) Limited
    [2014] eKLR
  • Nduhiu Gitahi Warugongo
    [1988] KLR; 1 KAR 100 [1988-92] 2 KAR 100
  • Butt v Rent Restriction Tribunal
    (1979) KLR
  • Absalom Dova v Tarbo Transporters
    (2013) eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 1B & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, Order 42 Rule 6 & Order 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Article 159 of the Constitution; Section 3 of the Employment & Labour Relations Court Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mwangi v Family Bank Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 331 of 2014) [2024] KEELRC 2177 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Notice of Motion dated 2nd November, 2023 in Employment & Labour Relations Court Cause. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/2177/eng@2024-07-04

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