[2021] KECA 569 (KLR)

[2021] KECA 569 (KLR)

The Court found that the ruling sought to be appealed was a negative order, dismissing the applicant's motion to strike out the suit, and as such, was incapable of execution or enforcement. Therefore, a stay of execution could not issue. Regarding the stay of proceedings, the Court held that the applicant failed to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KECA 569 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Insight Management Consultants Limited; Respondent: Bernard Barongo Amwoma & 116 Others; Respondent: Orbit Chemicals Limited
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 149 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Proceedings Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent
Judges
DK Musinga, GK Oenga
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Terminal Dues, Locus Standi, Stay of Proceedings, Negative Orders, Interlocutory Applications
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Civil Procedure Unlawful Termination Terminal Dues Locus Standi Stay of Proceedings Negative Orders Interlocutory Applications

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Insight Management Consultants Limited

Applicant

Bernard Barongo Amwoma & 116 Others

Respondent

Orbit Chemicals Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Proceedings Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a stay of execution and proceedings pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the ruling dismissing the applicant's motion constitutes a negative order incapable of execution.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's appeal is arguable and would be rendered nugatory if stay is not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the ruling sought to be appealed was a negative order, dismissing the applicant's motion to strike out the suit, and as such, was incapable of execution or enforcement. Therefore, a stay of execution could not issue. Regarding the stay of proceedings, the Court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate that the intended appeal was arguable, as the impugned ruling was interlocutory and did not make any definitive findings on the parties' rights. The Court further held that the applicant's concerns about the nugatory effect of the appeal were premature, as the Employment and Labour Relations Court had yet to determine the substantive suit. Consequently, the...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent

Orders

  • The applicant's motion for stay of execution and proceedings is dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the 1st respondent.