Mwarania v Cabinet Secretary National Treasury and Planning & another; Kenya Reinsurance Corporation Limited (Interested Party) (Petition E034 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1349 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court paused collection of Kshs 425,000 in taxed costs pending appeal, but only because the losing party agreed to deposit the money in court.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether substantial loss was demonstrated
The Petitioner did not illustrate substantial loss beyond asserting the appeal would be rendered nugatory, but the court found it prejudicial if he succeeded on appeal after execution of costs.
The court observed that the Petitioner relied only on the intended appeal being rendered nugatory, without illustrating how he would suffer substantial loss. However, because the application was filed together with the Memorandum of Appeal, the court found it would be prejudicial to the Petitioner if he succeeded on appeal yet the Respondent had already executed the order on costs. The court therefore exercised its discretion in the interest of justice to allow the appeal to be heard first.
Whether the application was made without unreasonable delay
Delay from 6th September 2024 to 23rd September 2024 was reasonable.
The ruling on taxation was delivered on 6th September 2024 and the application filed on 23rd September 2024, within the same month. The court found this period reasonable in all circumstances, satisfying the second condition under Order 42 Rule 6.
Whether security for costs was offered
Security is a requirement; stay granted on condition the applicant deposits the taxed sum within 45 days.
The Petitioner did not provide security in the application but stated in submissions he was willing to abide by the court's directions. Since security is a requirement under Order 42 Rule 6, the court conditioned the stay on the deposit of the taxed sum of Kshs 425,000/= to court within 45 days, failing which execution would proceed.
Legal principles established
#- Stay of execution requires substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay, and security for due performance of the decree.
- Execution being set in motion does not by itself amount to substantial loss; the applicant must show execution will irreparably negate the essential core of the appeal.
Court orders
#- 1.Stay of execution of the ruling/decree of 6th September 2024 taxing costs at Kshs 425,000/= granted pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal
- 2.Condition: the applicant to deposit the taxed sum of Kshs 425,000/= to the court within 45 days of the order, in default execution to proceed
- 3.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act and Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mwarania v Cabinet Secretary National Treasury and Planning & another; Kenya Reinsurance Corporation Limited (Interested Party) (Petition E034 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1349 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the excerpt (ELRC Petition, Nairobi). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1349/eng@2025-05-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.