[2021] KEELRC 688 (KLR)
The court found that the 1st Respondent, having entered into a binding agreement with the Claimant on 10th November 2020 to satisfy the judgment debt and auctioneer's fees, had no justification for seeking a stay of execution. The agreement was executed after the filing of the application for stay and was not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELRC 688 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Okwaro L.J. Liroi; Respondent: Dickson Mzungu; Respondent: DHL Excel Supply Chain [K] Limited; Respondent: Edward Simbauni; Respondent: Elkana Mong’are
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1348 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application for stay of execution declined
- Judges
- J Rika
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Termination, Stay of Execution, Judgment Enforcement, Appeal Procedure
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Okwaro L.J. Liroi
Claimant
Dickson Mzungu
Respondent
DHL Excel Supply Chain [K] Limited
Respondent
Edward Simbauni
Respondent
Elkana Mong’are
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1st Respondent is entitled to a stay of execution pending appeal in light of the post-judgment agreement on satisfaction of the decree.
- 2 Whether the court retains jurisdiction to grant stay after parties have executed an agreement on the mode of satisfaction of the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the 1st Respondent, having entered into a binding agreement with the Claimant on 10th November 2020 to satisfy the judgment debt and auctioneer's fees, had no justification for seeking a stay of execution. The agreement was executed after the filing of the application for stay and was not disavowed by the 1st Respondent. The court held that it was functus officio, as there was a valid judgment, an agreement on the mode of satisfaction, and an appeal pending before the Court of Appeal. The application for stay was therefore declined, as the 1st Respondent was obligated to honour both the judgment and the agreement, and his appeal would not be rendered nugatory by doing...
Court Disposition
application for stay of execution declined
Orders
- The Application dated 5th November 2020 is declined.
- No order on the costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR
RELATIONS COURT AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NUMBER 1348 OF 2014
BETWEEN
OKWARO L.J. LIROI.................................................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
1. DICKSON MZUNGU
2. DHL EXCEL SUPPLY CHAIN [K] LIMITED
3. EDWARD SIMBAUNI
4. ELKANA MONG’ARE.................................................. RESPONDENTS
RULING
1. Judgment was delivered in favour of the Claimant against the 1st Respondent, on 30th November 2018. The 1st Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant notice at Kshs. 15,000 and compensation for unfair termination equivalent of 3 months’ salary at Kshs. 45,000- total Kshs. 60,000. He was also ordered to meet Claimant’s costs.
2. The 1st Respondent has not satisfied the decree. He has filed an Appeal at the Court of Appeal, and applied to the E&LRC on 5th November 2020, for stay of execution pending hearing of that Appeal. That Application is the subject matter of the today’s Ruling.
3. There is on record an Agreement executed by the Parties after Judgment, dated 10th November 2020. The Agreement was executed a week after the filing of the Application for stay of execution. The 1st Respondent acknowledged Judgment-Debt of Kshs. 206,660, and Auctioneer’s Fee of Kshs. 68,940. He undertook to pay the debt in monthly instalments beginning with a sum of Kshs. 100,000, payable on 11th November 2020. The 1st Respondent undertook to pay Auctioneer’s Fee of Kshs. 50,000 on the same date. This agreement is exhibited in the Replying Affidavit filed by the Claimant, sworn on 30th November 2020.
4. In light of the Agreement dated 10th November 2020, the 1st Respondent has no justification in seeking the orders of stay of execution. There is a valid Judgment of the Court, made 3 years ago. The 1st Respondent made an Agreement on satisfaction of the Judgment.
5. He is pursuing an Appeal, the Agreement of 10th November 2020 notwithstanding. Decree was extracted and costs have been taxed. There is nothing left for this Court upon which to exercise its jurisdiction. There is an Agreement on the mode of satisfaction of the decree and there is an Appeal. The Court has not seen any Affidavit by the Respondent, disavowing the Agreement of 10th November 2020. He says nothing about the Agreement in his Submissions on the Application. The Claimant went before the Court of Appeal after a lengthy delay and was allowed to file his Appeal. Notice of Appeal is dated 10th August 2020. Judgment was delivered about 2 years before. The 1st Respondent states, Appeal was filed in October 2020. Why file an Appeal and, later in November 2020, execute Agreement on the mode of payment? The 1st Respondent should honour the Judgment delivered by this Court on 30th November 2018, and the Agreement dated 10th November 2020. His Appeal is not rendered nugatory by his honouring existing decretal and contractual obligations. The E&LRC in any event is no longer seized of the matter: it is functus officio.
IT IS ORDERED: -
a. The Application dated 5th November 2020 is declined.
b. No order on the costs.
DATED, SIGNED AND RELEASED TO THE PARTIES ELECTRONICALLY, UNDER MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND JUDICIARY COVID-19 GUIDELINES, AT NAIROBI, THIS 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2021.
JAMES RIKA
JUDGE