Onesmus Musyoki Kilonzo v Nation Media Group Limited (Cause 2355 of 2012) [2014] KEIC 117 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court refused to pause its ruling because the appeal had no real chance of success, and personally penalised the applicant's lawyers with costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether stay of execution/orders pending appeal should be granted
The application failed to meet the thresholds for stay; the intended appeal was not arguable
The court applied the settled principles in Halai & Another v Thorton & Turpin (1963) Ltd and Hassan Guyo Wakalo v Straman East Africa Ltd: sufficient cause, substantial loss, security, absence of unreasonable delay and nugatory-ness must all be established. The applicant, seeking to appeal a ruling upholding a declaration that Section 45(3) of the Employment Act was unconstitutional, could not demonstrate an arguable appeal because the High Court's jurisdiction to invalidate statutes is constitutionally grounded.
Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to declare Section 45(3) of the Employment Act unconstitutional
The High Court had jurisdiction under Article 165(3)(d)(i); any inconsistent law is void under Article 2(4)
Relying on the principle of constitutional supremacy and the Marbury v Madison lineage of judicial review, the court affirmed that only the judiciary interprets statutes and may invalidate legislation inconsistent with the Constitution. It upheld the High Court's declaration that Section 45(3) was unconstitutional, making any appeal against that premise fallacious.
Legal principles established
#- The High Court has jurisdiction under Article 165(3)(d)(i) to declare Acts of Parliament unconstitutional, and inconsistent laws are void under Article 2(4)
- The conditions for stay pending appeal are sufficient cause, substantial loss, security, no unreasonable delay, and that the appeal not be rendered nugatory
Court orders
#- 1.The Respondent/Applicant's Notice of Motion application for stay pending appeal is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the Claimant/Respondent, to be paid personally by the advocates for the Respondent
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya
- Samuel Momanyi v SDV Transami and Anor
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction to stay orders pending appeal; Article 165 Constitution of Kenya 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Onesmus Musyoki Kilonzo v Nation Media Group Limited (Cause 2355 of 2012) [2014] KEIC 117 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Cause No 2355 of 2012. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keic/2014/117/eng@2014-06-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.