Mohammed v Principal Secretary, Ministry of Interior & Co-ordination of National Government (Judicial Review Application E003 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1876 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenya court ruled that a state body that delays paying a judgment for years cannot use limitation rules to escape owing interest on that debt.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Respondent could seek review of the decree and certificate of order at this stage
The application for review was dismissed because the Respondent did not contest the decree and certificate when they were drawn and extracted, and had ample time to seek review before enforcement was sought.
Judgment was delivered on 4th June 2015 with an order for interest at 14% per annum. The decree and certificate of order reflected that rate. The Respondent never contested these documents when extracted and did not pursue its appeal, whose notice was struck out. A belated dispute over the rate and period of interest had no foundation and could not reopen a valid judgment.
Whether limitation bars recovery of interest on the decree
No - a judgment debtor who deliberately refuses to settle a money decree cannot use Section 4(4) of the Limitation of Actions Act to evade payment of interest.
The Respondent failed to satisfy the decree for almost 10 years, pursued an abortive appeal, and made assurances of payment while never disputing the interest content of the decree. The Applicant actively sought payment and enforcement. Allowing the judgment debtor to invoke limitation would reward its own delay and turn the limitation statute, meant as a shield, into a sword against enforcement.
Legal principles established
#- A party who deliberately refuses or ignores to settle a money decree cannot invoke the statute of limitation to decline to pay interest on the ground that payment has become time-barred
- The Limitation of Actions Act is a shield against stale claims and cannot be used as a sword to defeat enforcement of a valid judgment
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 24th April 2025 filed by the Respondent is declined
- 2.Costs to the Applicant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original and supervisory jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court over enforcement of its decree in Kericho E&LRC Cause No. 30 of 2014
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mohammed v Principal Secretary, Ministry of Interior & Co-ordination of National Government (Judicial Review Application E003 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1876 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Kericho E&LRC Cause No. 30 of 2014 (Enforcement - Application dated 24th April 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1876/eng@2025-06-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.