Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedELRC Cause (judgment of 2nd September 2016); Notice of Motion dated 22nd November 2023· [2025] KEELRC 2560 (KLR)

Kenya Game Hunting & Safaris Workers Union (Now Kenya Game Conservancy Tour & Safari Workers Union) v Payless Car Hire Tour and Rent a Car (Cause 459 of 2012) [2025] KEELRC 2560 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
25 September 2025
LNLINNET NDOLO
1,082 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ordered a company director to appear in person and disclose company accounts so a nine-year-old unpaid employee judgment can finally be enforced.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This Employment and Labour Relations Court ruling by Linnet Ndolo J, delivered virtually at Nairobi on 25th September 2025, determines the Claimant Union's Notice of Motion dated 22nd November 2023. The Union, holding an unexecuted decree from a judgment delivered on 2nd September 2016 in favour of grievants James Gitau, Alex Katiku and Julius Okelo over wrongful dismissal and unfair redundancy, sought orders summoning Jai Radia, said to be the Respondent company's Director, to show cause why he should not be punished for failure to satisfy the decree, with an alternative arrest order through the OCS Kamukunji Police Station. The Respondent opposed through Grounds of Opposition and a replying affidavit by Jai Radia, who denied being a Director, claimed to be a mere employee, and confirmed the Respondent had no attachable assets, while denying ownership of Merchandise Center on Kirinyaga Road. The Court applied Order 22 Rule 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules, allowing oral examination of an officer of a corporate judgment-debtor, and the holding in Ultimate Laboratories v Tasha Bio Service Limited that any person able to provide information in the nature of discovery may be summoned. The Court clarified that the proceedings were not a veil-lifting or committal plea but an examination process, and directed Jai Radia to appear in person on 15th October 2025 for examination on oath as to the Respondent's means and assets, and to file and serve the Respondent's books of account at least fourteen days before the examination. Costs were left in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a director or officer of a corporate judgment-debtor may be summoned for oral examination to aid execution of a decree

Holding

Yes; Order 22 Rule 35 permits oral examination of an officer of a body corporate with information about the judgment-debtor's property or means, and Jai Radia, having deponed on the Respondent's assets and tenancy, is a proper examinee

Reasoning

The Court applied Order 22 Rule 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules and the holding in Ultimate Laboratories v Tasha Bio Service Limited that any person capable of providing information in the nature of discovery may be summoned. Radia's own affidavit disclosed details of the Respondent's assets and premises, showing he is a person with discoverable information about the decree-debt's satisfaction. The application is an examination process, not a veil-lifting or committal plea.

p. 3
02

Whether the Court should grant the arrest/committal orders sought against Jai Radia

Holding

No; the Court declined to frame the matter as punishment or committal and instead directed attendance for examination on oath

Reasoning

The Claimant sought summons for Jai Radia to show cause why he should not be punished for the unsatisfied decree, backed by an arrest order. The Court held the proper course under Order 22 Rule 35 is examination of a known officer of the Respondent regarding its means and assets, not committal proceedings against a non-party; hence the examination and disclosure directions substituted for punishment and arrest orders.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a decree is for the payment of money, the decree-holder may seek oral examination of an officer of a corporate judgment-debtor or any other person with information about its property or means of satisfying the decree
  • Any person in a position to provide information in the nature of discovery may be summoned for examination

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Jai Radia to appear before the Court in person on 15th October 2025 for examination on oath as to the Respondent's means and assets
  2. 2.Jai Radia to file and serve the Claimant with the Respondent's books of account and any other relevant documents not later than fourteen (14) days before the date fixed for his examination
  3. 3.Costs of the application to be in the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 22 Rule 35

Cases cited (1)

  • Ultimate Laboratories v Tasha Bio Service Limited
    Nairobi HCCC No. 1287 of 2000 (unreported)
Jurisdiction invoked
Execution/examination jurisdiction of the ELRC over its own decree; Order 22 Rule 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Game Hunting & Safaris Workers Union (Now Kenya Game Conservancy Tour & Safari Workers Union) v Payless Car Hire Tour and Rent a Car (Cause 459 of 2012) [2025] KEELRC 2560 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELRC Cause (judgment of 2nd September 2016); Notice of Motion dated 22nd November 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2560/eng@2025-09-25

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.