Ososo v University of Nairobi (Cause E720 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 1213 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court reviewed a stay order, allowing money to be deposited in a Judiciary account instead of a joint bank account after compliance proved impossible.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether sufficient cause was demonstrated to justify review and variation of the stay condition of 29th February 2024
Review was granted; the Respondent's difficulty in complying with the joint-account condition and the holding of funds contrary to the order constituted sufficient cause.
The court found that the Respondent, a public entity represented by its Director of Legal & Corporate Board Services and not a law firm, faced genuine difficulty opening a joint interest-earning account in the names of the parties' advocates. Further, the entire balance of Kshs.2,130,000/= was transferred to Mohammed Muigai LLP contrary to the order, and a change of advocates left both the court and the Respondent unaware which firm holds the funds. The Claimant's alleged undertaking not to execute the decree was unsupported by evidence and could not override the express court order. Sufficient cause was therefore shown under Rule 33.
Legal principles established
#- Section 16 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act and Rule 33 of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules, 2016 empower the Court to review its judgments, awards, orders or decrees on the grounds enumerated in Rule 33(1), including for any other sufficient reason.
- An undertaking by a party cannot substitute compliance with an express order of the court.
Court orders
#- 1.The order of 29th February 2024 is varied such that the balance of Kshs.2,130,000/= be deposited in a Judiciary Account pending the hearing and determination of Civil Appeal No. E687 of 2023 or any agreement between the parties
- 2.The firm of Mohammed Muigai LLP is ordered to deposit the sum of Kshs. 2,130,000/= in the Judiciary Account within 21 days and avail a copy of the deposit slip to the Respondent
- 3.Parties shall bear their own costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 3A and 3B of the Civil Procedure Act; Section 16 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act; Rule 33 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ososo v University of Nairobi (Cause E720 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 1213 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (relates to Civil Appeal No. E687 of 2023 stay proceedings). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1213/eng@2025-04-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.