[2023] KEELRC 2474 (KLR)

[2023] KEELRC 2474 (KLR)

The court found that the appellant failed to present clear and consistent records regarding the specific lower court cause from which the judgment arose, with references to both Mombasa CM ELRC No E032 of 2022 and No 1721 of 2019. This lack of clarity undermined the application for stay, as it was not possible to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELRC 2474 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Ahmed Shariff t/a Shariff Water Supply; Respondent: Gona Kazungu Ngwiya
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Appeal E058 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
M Mbarũ
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Appeal Process, Terminal Dues, Judgment Enforcement
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Stay of Execution Appeal Process Terminal Dues Judgment Enforcement

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmed Shariff t/a Shariff Water Supply

Appellant

Gona Kazungu Ngwiya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to an order of stay of execution of the judgment pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the application for stay is supported by proper and clear records relating to the correct lower court cause.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant failed to present clear and consistent records regarding the specific lower court cause from which the judgment arose, with references to both Mombasa CM ELRC No E032 of 2022 and No 1721 of 2019. This lack of clarity undermined the application for stay, as it was not possible to ascertain the precise judgment being appealed against. While acknowledging the appellant's right of appeal, the court held that the duty to present proper records lies with the applicant. Without such clarity, granting a stay would not serve the intended purpose of securing the appeal. Consequently, the application for stay was dismissed, and the appellant was directed to file a...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dated 17 July 2023 is dismissed.
  • Costs to the respondent.