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

Oyatsi v Nzoia Sugar Company Limited (Cause 361(N) of 2009) [2025] KEELRC 3347 (KLR) (27 November 2025) (Ruling)

[2025] KEELRC 3347 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
3347
Citation
[2025] KEELRC 3347 (KLR)
Decided
27 November 2025
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeMotion ApplicationPostureRespondent's objection to Claimant's motion applicationCoramCN BAARI, Ringera
The Court lacks jurisdiction to stay proceedings relating to an appellate decree and there are no live proceedings before the Court that can be stayed.

Facts

The Claimant/Applicant sought to stay further proceedings pending the hearing and determination of an application in the Court of Appeal. The Respondent argued that the Court of Appeal had already rendered a judgment and that the Court lacked jurisdiction to stay the proceedings.

Issues

  • Whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the present Motion.
  • Whether there are proceedings capable of being stayed.

Reasoning

The Court ruled that once the matter proceeded on appeal, the Court became functus ocio, and only the Court of Appeal can stay its own judgment. The Court also found that the remaining proceedings are merely administrative and not capable of being stayed.

Outcome

The motion application is dismissed in its entirety.

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 18th February 2025 is hereby dismissed in its entirety.
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case