Republic v Ole Lenku & 2 others; Marima (Ex parte Applicant) (Judicial Review Application E042 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2961 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court ordered Kajiado County officials to pay and reinstate a wrongfully dismissed employee, but only until his contract expired.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the respondents have failed or neglected to satisfy the judgment, decree and certificate of costs issued in Nairobi ELRC Petition No. E0178 of 2024
- 2.Whether an order of mandamus should issue compelling the 1st and 3rd respondents to implement the decree, including reinstatement and payment of salary and benefits
- 3.Whether the lapse of the applicant's contract on 27.09.2025 and the alleged substantive filling of the position render reinstatement impossible or impracticable
- 4.Whether the pending appeal and alternative remedies bar the grant of mandamus
Key legal issues
#Whether mandamus should issue to compel implementation of the decree
Mandamus issues compelling the 1st and 3rd respondents to implement the decree, with compliance on reinstatement limited to the contract lapse date of 27.09.2025
The respondents admitted awareness of the judgment, decree and certificate of taxation but failed to satisfy them. The court held the reinstatement order was self-executing and that the respondents had not rebutted the claim of non-implementation. The alleged pending appeal had not been demonstrated and no stay of execution existed. Alternative remedies argued by the respondents were misconceived. Mandamus was therefore granted, but compliance with continued engagement was limited to 27.09.2025 when the term contract lapsed.
Effect of lapse of the applicant's term contract on 27.09.2025
The respondents' obligation to comply with the reinstatement order extends only up to 27.09.2025, and they are bound to pay the applicant up to that date
Although the respondents argued that reinstatement became impracticable after the contract lapsed and that the position had been substantively filled, they did not exhibit the letter of substantive appointment. The court found the lapse established and held that compliance with the self-executory reinstatement order runs to the lapse date, after which payment obligations are confined to the period up to 27.09.2025.
Legal principles established
#- A self-executory reinstatement order binds the employer up to the lawful separation date where the term contract lapses, and failure to implement it justifies mandamus
- A pending appeal without a stay of execution does not bar enforcement of a decree by mandamus
- No bar exists to granting mandamus to compel implementation of a judgment, decree and certificate of taxation
Court orders
#- 1.Order of mandamus issued compelling the 1st and 3rd respondents to implement the decree from the judgment of Nairobi ELRC Petition No. E0178 of 2024 delivered on 19.12.2024, including the declarations of ultra vires termination and constitutional violations, the quashing of the termination letter dated 16/08/2023 and reinstatement, payment of salary and benefits from August 2023 (Kshs.2,994,240.00 less PAYE) with continued working and earning per terms of service until 27.09.2025 when the contract lapsed, payment by 01.03.2025 failing interest at Court rates, and payment of the suit costs assessed at Kshs.191,788.40 jointly or severally
- 2.The respondents to pay the applicant's costs of the application
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 8 and 9 of the Law Reform Act Cap 26, Order 53 Rules 3 and 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010, Section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act Cap 40 and Rule 10(2) of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules 2024
Relief refused
#Implementation of the reinstatement/continued engagement beyond 27.09.2025
The court found the term contract subject of the order lapsed on 27.09.2025, so compliance with the self-executory reinstatement order runs only up to that date
Costs
The respondents to pay the applicant's costs of the application.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The order of mandamus is hereby issued compelling the 1st respondent and 3rd respondent to implement the decree emanating from the judgment of Nairobi ELRC Petition No. E0178 of 2024
The respondents to pay the applicant's costs of the application.
The Court considers that the order of reinstatement was self-executing and the respondents have not rebutted the applicant's case that they have failed to implement the order of reinstatement, albeit, up to lawful separation date, 27.09.2025.
There is no established bar to grant of an order of mandamus in the instant case and the order will issue in terms of the findings by the Court.
Issues in the judgment
#Discrepancy in the pleaded contract lapse date: the replying affidavit refers to both 27.09.2025 and 26.09.2025
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Ole Lenku & 2 others; Marima (Ex parte Applicant) (Judicial Review Application E042 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2961 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Nairobi ELRC Judicial Review (Mandamus) Application arising from Nairobi ELRC Petition No. E0178 of 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2961/eng@2025-10-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.