[2025] KEELRC 1094 (KLR)
The court found that the 1st Respondent had previously undertaken to satisfy the decree through monthly instalments but failed to do so without justification. The court held that there was no valid reason for the Respondent's non-compliance, and the repeated applications for stay of execution were unwarranted. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEELRC 1094 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: George Shitoko Uwanami; Respondent: Maxiguard Equities Limited; Respondent: Catholic Diocese of Nakuru
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause E303 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution
- Outcome
- Application for stay of execution declined; file marked as closed.
- Judges
- J Rika
- Legal Topics
- Execution of Decree, Stay of Execution, Instalment Payments
- 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
George Shitoko Uwanami
Applicant
Maxiguard Equities Limited
Respondent
Catholic Diocese of Nakuru
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1st Respondent is entitled to a stay of execution of the decree.
- 2 Whether the application for stay was urgent and merited consideration.
- 3 Whether the 1st Respondent's failure to satisfy the decree justified execution proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the 1st Respondent had previously undertaken to satisfy the decree through monthly instalments but failed to do so without justification. The court held that there was no valid reason for the Respondent's non-compliance, and the repeated applications for stay of execution were unwarranted. The application for stay was not urgent, as it was brought two weeks after the relevant events, and there was nothing left to be stayed since the process of execution had already commenced. Consequently, the court declined the application and ordered the file closed, marking the end of the proceedings.
Court Disposition
Application for stay of execution declined; file marked as closed.
Orders
- The application dated 21st March 2025 is declined.
- The file is marked as closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Uwanami v Maxiguard Equities Limited & another (Cause E303 of 2014) [2025] KEELRC 1094 (KLR) (4 April 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEELRC 1094 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru
Cause E303 of 2014
J Rika, J
April 4, 2025
Between
George Shitoko Uwanami
Claimant
and
Maxiguard Equities Limited
1st Respondent
Catholic Diocese of nakuru
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. The Court gave a ruling dated 28th February 2025, on two applications brought by the 1st Respondent.
2. It was noted that this is an old Claim, and the 1st Respondent had in the past, given an undertaking to satisfy the decree through monthly instalments of Kshs. 10,000.
3. There is absolutely no reason why the 1st Respondent did not satisfy decree, which necessitated the Claimant to apply for execution.
4. There is no reason why the 1st Respondent should file multiple applications seeking stay of execution of decree.
5. The application dated 21st March 2025, has only been placed before the Court 2 weeks later, on 4th April 2025, and cannot be urgent.
6. The 1st Respondent states that proclamation was made on its goods on 17th March 2025, and attachment would take place after 7 days, which would be effective 24th March 2025.
7. There is nothing to be stayed by this Court.
8. The application is declined, and this file opened in 2014, shall now be marked as closed.
9. A copy of the ruling to be availed to all the parties.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED ELECTRONICALLY AT NAKURU, THIS 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2025. JAMES RIKAJUDGE