Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in judgment· [2025] KEELRC 2660 (KLR)

Karimi v Tradco Services Limited (Cause E096 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2660 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
2 October 2025
MMM. Mbarũ
843 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Tradco Services Limited, described in the judgment as the respondent, filed an application dated 11 September 2025 seeking a stay of execution of the judgment delivered on 27 March 2025 in a claim where the decretal sum was KSH 2,106,205. The application was brought under article 50(1) of the Constitution, section 3 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act and Rule 21 of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules, supported by an affidavit of Jane Wangari, a legal officer, who argued that the trial court may have erred, that the appeal had a high chance of success, that funds diverted to satisfy the decree would prejudice the appeal, that the application was made without delay, and that the respondent was willing to furnish security. The claimant opposed the application through a replying affidavit, asserting her right to enforce a valid judgment, and pointing out that the respondent's Notice of Appeal filed on 9 April 2025 had been rejected by the Court of Appeal, that no other notice had been filed, that no leave to appeal out of time had been sought, and that the application was brought five months after judgment. The court framed one issue: whether a stay of execution should be allowed. It held that Article 50(1) must be applied with caution and a general reference to it cannot sustain a stay; that under Rule 21 read with Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the applicant must show substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay and security. No appeal was pending, the delay of five months was inordinate, and security for a non-existent appeal had no foundation. The application was dismissed with costs on 2 October 2025.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the respondent was entitled to a stay of execution under Rule 21 of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules and Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Holding

The application failed as no appeal was pending, there was inordinate delay of five months, and no substantial loss was demonstrated.

Reasoning

The court set out the three governing principles: substantial loss, application without unreasonable delay, and security for due performance. It found the respondent did not specify the purpose of the stay, no Notice of Appeal had been filed and no appeal was in progress. The five-month delay was inordinate and not excusable, and offering security for a non-existent appeal had no foundation.

p. 2
02

Whether Article 50(1) of the Constitution and section 3 of the ELRC Act could ground the stay application

Holding

They could not; Article 50(1) must be interpreted with caution and a general reference to it, without proper application, cannot support a stay.

Reasoning

Relying on Shollei v Judicial Service Commission & another, the court cautioned against literal application of Article 50(1) in civil and employment claims. It also held that juxtaposing section 3 of the ELRC Act in this manner would not elicit any meaningful application.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A general reference to Article 50(1) of the Constitution without proper application cannot support a stay of execution application
  • Where there is an unreasonable delay in seeking a stay of execution, the court's discretion is fettered
  • A party holding a valid judgment has a legitimate expectation that it should be enforced

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 11 September 2025 is dismissed with costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 50(1)
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Actsection 3
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) RulesRule 21
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 42 Rule 6

Cases cited (3)

  • Shollei v Judicial Service Commission & another
    [2022] KESC 5 (KLR)
  • Mwangi t/a Karinga Mwangi & Company Advocates v RAEI Investment Limited; Wanyama & another (Interested Parties)
    [2025] KEELC 6097 (KLR)
  • Mbukoni Services Limited & another v Mutinda Reuben Nzili & 2 others
    [2021] KEHC 4795 (KLR)
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 50(1) of the Constitution, section 3 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, and Rule 21 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Karimi v Tradco Services Limited (Cause E096 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2660 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2660/eng@2025-10-02

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