Bizrock Group Limited v Odhiambo (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E037 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 3711 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court paused an employee's lawsuit because the employer showed it had a genuine appeal based on a signed settlement agreement.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Threshold for stay of proceedings pending appeal
The court applied the Global Tours and Travels principles as distilled by the applicant: an arguable appeal, greater advantage in staying, and expeditious filing. All three were satisfied, and staying served the interest of justice.
The court noted the memorandum of appeal raised arguable issues on the discharge agreement extinguishing the cause of action, the application was filed about a month after the ruling (not inordinate delay), and failure to stay the trial proceedings would render the appeal academic. Drawing on Butt v Rent Restriction Tribunal, the discretion was exercised to prevent the appeal from being rendered nugatory.
Effect of missing authority to plead on the application
The objection failed; no authority to plead was required since the supporting affidavit was sworn by the company's director, and the burden of proving lack of authority lay on the respondent, who produced no such evidence.
Relying on Spire Bank Limited v Land Registrar & 2 Others, the court endorsed the position that Order 4 rule 1(4) was not intended to be used as a procedural technicality to strike out suits where no evidence of lack of authorization is produced. The deponent, Ramji Naran Patel, described himself as a director of the applicant, and an authority to plead can be filed at any time with leave.
Reasonableness of the delay in filing the application
There was no unreasonable delay; the application was filed approximately one month after the impugned ruling and the memorandum of appeal within 14 days.
The court found the delay of roughly one month did not amount to inordinate delay, noting the memorandum of appeal was filed on 7th July 2025, barely 14 days after the ruling, and that the applicant had also filed the record of appeal, demonstrating vigilance in pursuing the appeal.
Legal principles established
#- The court's discretion on stay pending appeal is to be exercised so that a successful appeal is not rendered nugatory.
- Stay of proceedings should be granted where the appeal is arguable, the application is made without unreasonable delay, and failure to stay would render the appeal academic.
- Lack of an authority to plead or file a suit on behalf of a company does not invalidate proceedings commenced on its behalf; the burden of proving lack of authority lies on the person alleging it.
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 30th July, 2025 is allowed
- 2.Stay of proceedings in Mavoko MCELRC Cause No. E264 of 2024 pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal
- 3.Costs of the application to the respondent in the cause
- 4.The appeal to be fast-tracked; the appellant to file a record of appeal within 30 days
- 5.Mention on 16th January 2026 for further directions
- On appeal from
- Magistrates' Court (ELRC), Mavoko
- MCELRC Cause No. E264 of 2024
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appellate jurisdiction over appeals from the lower court, with stay of proceedings governed by Rule 73 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Rules, 2024 read with Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Bizrock Group Limited v Odhiambo (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E037 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 3711 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELRC Appeal (Nairobi), arising from Mavoko MCELRC Cause No. E264 of 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/3711/eng@2025-12-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.