[2025] KEELRC 602 (KLR)
The court found that the 1st Respondent's applications for stay of execution and for payment of the decretal sum by instalments had already been determined in a previous ruling dated 19th June 2023. The subsequent applications, dated 1st August 2024 and 3rd September 2024, sought to re-litigate issues that were res...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEELRC 602 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: George Shitoko Uwanamo; Respondent: Maxiguard Equities Limited; Respondent: Catholic Diocese of Nakuru
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 303 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Cause / Ruling on Post Judgment Applications for Stay of Execution and Payment by Instalments
- Outcome
- Applications dismissed as res judicata and abuse of process; costs awarded to the Claimant.
- Judges
- J Rika
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Termination, Decretal Sum Enforcement, Stay of Execution, Res Judicata
- 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 Uwanamo
Applicant
Maxiguard Equities Limited
Respondent
Catholic Diocese of Nakuru
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Cause / Ruling on Post Judgment Applications for Stay of Execution and Payment by Instalments
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applications for stay of execution and payment of the decretal sum by instalments are res judicata.
- 2 Whether the applications constitute an abuse of the court process.
- 3 Whether the Catholic Diocese of Nakuru is properly joined as a respondent.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the 1st Respondent's applications for stay of execution and for payment of the decretal sum by instalments had already been determined in a previous ruling dated 19th June 2023. The subsequent applications, dated 1st August 2024 and 3rd September 2024, sought to re-litigate issues that were res judicata. The court held that these applications constituted a gross abuse of the court process, as they were intended to delay the Claimant from enjoying the fruits of his judgment. The court also noted that the Catholic Diocese of Nakuru was improperly joined as a respondent, as there was no clear application or order to that effect. Accordingly, the court declined both...
Court Disposition
Applications dismissed as res judicata and abuse of process; costs awarded to the Claimant.
Orders
- The applications dated 1st August 2024 and 3rd September 2024 are declined.
- Costs on both applications to the Claimant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
Uwanamo v Maxiguard Equities Limited & another (Cause 303 of 2014) [2025] KEELRC 602 (KLR) (28 February 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEELRC 602 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Cause 303 of 2014
J Rika, J
February 28, 2025
Between
George Shitoko Uwanamo
Claimant
and
Maxiguard Equities Limited
1st Respondent
Catholic Diocese of Nakuru
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. Judgment was delivered in favour of the Claimant against the 1st Respondent, on 6th December 2022.
2. The Claimant was granted a total sum of Kshs. 210,065, comprising compensation for unfair termination and terminal benefits.
3. On 19th June 2023, the 1st Respondent applied to be allowed to pay the decretal sum in instalments of Kshs. 10,000, monthly.
4. The Court allowed the 1st Respondent to pay half of the decretal sum within 30 days, and the balance in 30 days.
5. The 1st Respondent does not seem to have complied, but has instead, subsequently filed wasteful applications, delaying full and final settlement of the Judgment.
6. First, the 1st Respondent presented an application dated 1st August 2024, seeking orders for stay of execution, and again, to be allowed to liquidate the decretal sum, in instalments of Kshs. 50,000 monthly.
7. The 1st Respondent joined the Catholic Diocese of Nakuru as a 2nd Respondent. It is not clear from the record in what context, the Diocese is named as a 2nd Respondent.
8. Another application dated 3rd September 2024 was filed by the 1st Respondent, asking the Court to stay execution of its Judgment. The second application again names the Diocese as a 2nd Respondent, without an explanation.
9. The Claimant relies on his affidavit sworn on 9th August 2024. His position is that the application by the 1st Respondent to be allowed to pay the decretal sum in instalments, and for stay of execution of Judgment is res judicata.
10. Parties agreed to have the applications considered and determined on the strength of their affidavits and submissions. They confirmed filing and exchange of their submissions at the last appearance before the Court, on 6th November 2024.
The Court Finds: - 11. Both applications are in gross abuse of the process of the Court. The Court adjudicated the prayer on the mode of payment of the decretal sum, and on stay of execution, in the Ruling on the application dated 19th June 2023. The applications filed by the 1st Respondent subsequently are in gross abuse of the process of the Court, and are res judicata.
12. It is not clear what role the Catholic Diocese of Nakuru is meant to play, in the applications. It was not a Respondent from the beginning. The Court has not seen any application and orders, introducing the Diocese as a Co-Respondent.
13. In its submissions dated 4th November 2024, the 1st Respondent does not name the Diocese as a Co-Respondent.
14. This is an old Claim, filed 11 years ago. Judgment was made in 2022, and even if the Claimant had paid instalments of Kshs. 10,000 or 50,000 monthly, effective 3 years ago, as desired, there would be no decretal sum pending satisfaction today. The Respondent has not acted rationally.
15. The 2 applications are in gross abuse of the process of the Court, and intended to delay the Claimant, in actualizing the fruits of his Judgment, delivered 3 years ago, in 2022.
It Is Ordered: -a.The applications dated 1st August 2024 and 3rd September 2024, are declined.b.Costs on both applications to the Claimant.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED ELECTRONICALLY AT NAKURU, THIS 28TH FEBRUARY 2025. JAMES RIKAJUDGE