Wasike v Gramo Properties Limited (Civil Appeal E076 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2792 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court allowed a company to pay a Kshs. 410,850 judgment in monthly instalments, ruling redundancy notices can prove financial hardship without audited accounts.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the judgment debtor satisfied the Order 21 Rule 12 threshold for payment of the decretal sum by instalments
The applicant met the test: it moved the court within the 30-day stay period with a reasonable instalment offer, and redundancy notices demonstrated financial difficulty; leave to pay by instalments was granted on those terms.
The court applied the four factors drawn from Rajabali Alidina v Remtulla Alidina (1961) EA 565 as cited in Awuonda v Kenya Commercial Bank. On circumstances, the debt arose from a decree dated 12 June 2025. On conduct, the applicant filed this application on 8 July 2025 within the 30-day stay, evidencing good faith and diligence. On financial position, redundancy notices to eight employees demonstrated constrained capacity, and the court declined to demand audited accounts. On bona fides, the applicant acknowledged the debt and offered structured payments backed by post-dated cheques. The discretion was exercised judicially in the applicant's favour.
Whether the absence of audited accounts or financial records defeats a claim of financial hardship
No; redundancy notices sufficed as demonstration of financial challenges, so the court found no basis to require further evidence of financial status.
The respondent invoked an adverse-inference argument (per Grain Industries Limited v Ali) that failure to produce financial records in a party's possession justifies an adverse inference. The court nevertheless accepted the redundancy notices as adequate demonstration of financial difficulty, holding that redundancy can itself evidence an employer's financial challenges, and exercised its discretion to grant the instalment relief without further proof.
Legal principles established
#- The court's discretion to order payment of a decretal sum by instalments must be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily, upon sufficient cause shown by the judgment debtor
- The four-fold test for sufficient cause under Order 21 Rule 12: circumstances under which the debt was contracted, conduct of the debtor, financial position, and bona fides in offering to pay a fair proportion of the debt
- Redundancy notices may demonstrate an employer's financial hardship without production of audited accounts
Court orders
#- 1.Stay of execution of the judgment dated 12th June 2025 on condition that the applicant/judgment debtor settles the decretal sum of Kshs. 410,850 plus interest and all costs in instalments
- 2.First instalment of Kshs. 100,000 payable in October within 7 days of the Ruling
- 3.Subsequent monthly instalments of Kshs. 50,000 each month until payment in full
- 4.Costs of the application to the appellant/respondent
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court, Milimani
- MCELRC No. E1582 of 2022
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 21 Rule 12 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 (inherent judicial discretion over payment of decretal sums by instalments)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wasike v Gramo Properties Limited (Civil Appeal E076 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2792 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Notice of Motion dated 8th July 2025 (in appeal from Milimani MCELRC No. E1582 of 2022). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2792/eng@2025-10-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.