Pamtac Kenya Limited v Simon Mwangi Mareru
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment appeal court paused enforcement of a Kshs. 982,755 judgment, but only after the employer deposits half the money in court.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Substantial loss and delay
The applicant established risk of the appeal being rendered nugatory and filed the application without delay
The appeal was filed within 30 days and the application brought without unreasonable delay. The respondent did not rebut the applicant's assertion that he could not refund the decretal amount if the appeal succeeded, establishing the risk of nugatory appeal required under Order 42 Rule 6(2).
Security for due performance of the decree
Security is mandatory; half the decretal sum deposited in court within 30 days suffices
The applicant asked the court to dispense with security and instead expedite the appeal, but the court agreed with the respondent that security is mandatory. Balancing the arguable grounds of appeal against the mandatory requirement, the court fixed half the decretal sum as sufficient security.
Arguability of the appeal
The memorandum of appeal raises arguable points
On perusal of the memorandum, the court found arguable points, specifically the grant of service pay where the respondent was allegedly covered under NSSF and the burden of proof of overtime awarded for the period of service and payable salary.
Legal principles established
#- Where the ELRC (Procedure) Rules are silent on conditions for stay pending appeal, Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules fills the lacuna
- Furnishing security for the decretal sum is mandatory for a stay of execution pending appeal
- Stay discretion should be exercised so as not to render a successful appeal nugatory
Court orders
#- 1.Stay of execution of the judgment delivered by the Mavoko Magistrate Court on 13th May 2026 pending hearing and determination of the appeal, on condition that half the decretal amount is deposited in court within 30 days, in default the stay to lapse
- 2.Parties to take directions on the appeal
- 3.Costs of the application to the Respondent
- 4.The decision to apply in Machakos ELRCA No. E024 of 2026 (Pamtac Kenya Limited v Tonny Ngali Valasa) for judicial economy
- 5.Mention on 16th October 2026 for further directions in the appeal
- On appeal from
- Magistrate Court at Mavoko (ELRC)
- ELRC Case No. E026 of 2024
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appellate jurisdiction over appeals from the Magistrate Court; application under Sections 1A, 1B, 3, 3A and 34 of the Civil Procedure Act, Order 42 Rule 6 & 7 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, Section 38 of the Small Claims Court Act and Article 159 of the Constitution
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Pamtac Kenya Limited v Simon Mwangi Mareru", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Appeal No. E023 of 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2547/eng@2026-09-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.