Muthaiga Travel Limited v Dawoodia (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 1014 of 2016) [2025] KEELRC 1037 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment Court refused to pause collection of an Kshs 11.68 million award, ruling that a pending lawsuit alone is not a reason to block execution.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Applicant was entitled to stay of execution pending determination of the Commercial Suit
No. The Applicant failed to demonstrate substantial loss, prejudice, enforceability difficulties or exceptional circumstances, offered no security, and the balance of convenience favours the Decree Holder.
The court distilled three guiding considerations: the nature and status of the pending suit, potential prejudice to either party, and security of costs. The commercial suit's conclusion could take over a year given case backlog and was outside this court's control. General assertions of operational disruption were unsubstantiated; no evidence showed the Decree Holder could not reimburse if the commercial suit succeeded. No security was offered. Execution is a lawful process and not itself a ground for stay.
The standards governing the discretionary grant of stay of execution pending suit
Discretion must be exercised judiciously, on fixed principles and evidence, only in exceptional cases where the interest of justice requires, and the decree holder is not to be deprived of the fruits of the decree except for good reasons.
Drawing on Order 22 Rule 25, Kenyan, Indian and Ugandan authorities, the court held there are no fixed guidelines; the matter is determined case by case on special circumstances. Reliance was placed on the Indian position that the power to stay execution is exercised with great care only in special cases, and the Ugandan factors for cross-claim based stays were adopted and adapted into three considerations.
Legal principles established
#- Stay of execution pending suit under Order 22 Rule 25 is discretionary and must be justified by exceptional circumstances, not merely the pendency of another suit.
- A judgment creditor is prima facie entitled to the fruits of judgment, and the court must balance competing rights on the facts.
Court orders
#- 1.Application dated 19th December, 2024 for stay of execution dismissed with costs to the Respondent
- 2.Garnishee Nisi Order of 18th December 2024 confirmed as Garnishee Order Absolute for payment by the Garnishee to the Decree Holder of Kshs. 11,680,480.04 from amounts held at Account Nos. 1108784240 and 1108477429 at Kenya Commercial Bank Limited, Village Market Branch
- 3.Costs to Garnishee of Kshs. 20,000 deductible from any of the said bank accounts
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 22 Rule 25 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 (stay of execution pending suit between decree-holder and judgment-debtor)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Muthaiga Travel Limited v Dawoodia (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 1014 of 2016) [2025] KEELRC 1037 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (Garnishee proceedings arising from the decree dated 21st November, 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1037/eng@2025-03-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.