SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Elite Tools Limited v Murei (Civil Appeal (Application) E564 of 2025) [2026] KECA 230 (KLR) (13 February 2026) (Ruling)

[2026] KECA 230 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
230
Citation
[2026] KECA 230 (KLR)
Decided
13 February 2026
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureApplication for stay of execution of Employment and Labour Relations Court rulingCoramS. GATEMBU KAIRU, MUMBI NGUGI, P. NYAMWEYA
Holding

The application fails and is dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Facts

The respondent, Gilbert Kiprotich Murei, was injured in the course of his employment with the appellant, Elite Tools Limited. The Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services awarded the respondent compensation of Kshs.813,340. The respondent applied to have the award adopted as a judgment and for judgment to be entered in his favour. The Employment and Labour Relations Court (ELRC) entered judgment in favour of the respondent against the applicant for Kshs.813,340 and interest at court rates. The applicant filed a Notice of Appeal and sought an order of stay of execution of the ruling pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant is facing a financial crisis and is not in a position to deposit the entire amount of Kshs.813,340 as security pending appeal.
  2. Whether the appeal is frivolous and will be rendered nugatory if the orders of stay are declined.

Reasoning

The Court gives the applicant the benefit of doubt in finding that the appeal is not frivolous. However, the Court is not persuaded that the applicant has satisfied the Court that the appeal will be rendered nugatory. The applicant has averred that it is experiencing financial difficulties, but the concern should be the financial ability of the respondent. The applicant does not assert that the respondent would not be able to refund the judgment amount in the event that the appeal succeeds.

Outcome

Application dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case