University of Nairobi v Kibunja (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E008 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1854 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court paused enforcement of a Kshs.2.7 million gratuity award pending appeal, but only on condition that half the money is first deposited in court.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Threshold for stay of execution under Order 42 Rule 6(2)
The Applicant satisfied the threshold: no delay (application filed within the stay period), substantial loss demonstrated as a public institution unable to recover funds, and security addressed by a conditional deposit order.
The court applied Order 42 Rule 6(2), requiring proof of substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay and security. It found the application was filed within 30 days of the judgment, before the 30-day stay period lapsed. As a public entity, recovery of the decretal sum post-appeal would be impractical, satisfying substantial loss. Security was handled by ordering a partial deposit.
Arguability of the intended appeal
The appeal raises substantial legal questions on retrospective application of a CBA and has high prospects of success.
The Appellant's grounds include retrospective application of the 2013–2017 CBA contrary to precedent, and ignored counterclaim and submissions. The court found these raise substantial legal questions on CBA interpretation, supporting stay pending appeal.
Balance of convenience and public interest
A conditional stay balances the Appellant's prudent use of public funds (Article 232(1)(b)) against the Respondent's right to gratuity (Article 41).
The court weighed the Appellant's interest in protecting public funds against the Respondent's right to fair labour practices and gratuity under Article 41, concluding a conditional stay with a security deposit best balances both interests.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant for stay of execution under Order 42 Rule 6(2) must prove substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay, and offer security; a public institution's difficulty in recovering decretal funds supports a finding of substantial loss.
- Where an applicant satisfies the stay threshold and public funds are at stake, a conditional stay balancing public interest under Article 232(1)(b) against individual rights under Article 41 may be granted.
Court orders
#- 1.The Respondent shall deposit fifty percent (50%) of the decretal sum (Kshs.1,380,902.30) to court in thirty (30) days
- 2.Each party shall bear their costs of this application
- 3.Mention on 01.10.2025 before the Deputy Registrar for confirmation of compliance on filing of a Record of Appeal
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court (Magistrate's Court, MCELRC)
- MCELRC No. E419 of 2022
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules (stay of execution pending appeal)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "University of Nairobi v Kibunja (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E008 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1854 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). MCELRC No. E419 of 2022 (appeal thereto; application dated 17th January 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1854/eng@2025-06-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.