[2019] KEELRC 2334 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 2334 (KLR)

The court found that the Respondent's application for further stay and enforcement of the consent order was unnecessary and ill-advised, as the parties had already reached a binding consent on the payment and deposit of the decretal sum. The court noted that the amount deposited in the joint interest-earning account...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELRC 2334 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: John Mutia Maluki; Respondent: Schenker Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 746 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Compliance With Consent Order
Outcome
Application dismissed; Respondent ordered to pay Kshs 500,000/- to Claimant within 7 days; costs to Claimant.
Judges
MSA Makhandia
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Consent Orders, Statutory Deductions, Party and Party Costs
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Stay of Execution Consent Orders Statutory Deductions Party and Party Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Mutia Maluki

Claimant

Schenker Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Compliance With Consent Order

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent is entitled to further stay of execution pending appeal after a consent order was adopted by the Court.
  2. 2 Whether the Respondent complied with the consent order regarding payment and statutory deductions.
  3. 3 Whether the application to enforce or vary the consent order was frivolous or an abuse of court process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Respondent's application for further stay and enforcement of the consent order was unnecessary and ill-advised, as the parties had already reached a binding consent on the payment and deposit of the decretal sum. The court noted that the amount deposited in the joint interest-earning account was sufficient to cover any statutory deductions required by law. The Respondent's delay in bringing the application until after taxation of costs suggested an intent to frustrate the Claimant's enjoyment of the judgment. The court declined to grant any of the orders sought by the Respondent and ordered compliance with the original consent, specifically the payment of Kshs...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; Respondent ordered to pay Kshs 500,000/- to Claimant within 7 days; costs to Claimant.

Orders

  • The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant the sum of Kshs 500,000/- as agreed in the consent within 7 days from the date of the ruling.
  • Costs of the application are awarded to the Claimant.