Pascalia Mwende Matheka v Silverbird Travel Plus Limited & another [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya
Judgment Date
October 16, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Pascalia Mwende Matheka v Silverbird Travel Plus Limited & another [2020] eKLR. Gain insights into key legal principles and the court's findings in this impactful ruling.

Case Brief: Pascalia Mwende Matheka v Silverbird Travel Plus Limited & another [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Pascalia Mwende Matheka v. Silverbird Travel Plus Limited & Caroline Malinda
- Case Number: Cause No. 1823 of 2014
- Court: Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya
- Date Delivered: 16th October 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues presented to the court involve:
1. Whether the applicant, Pascalia Mwende Matheka, is entitled to the release of the decretal sum held in a joint account pending the determination of the respondent's appeal.
2. The implications of the respondent's failure to file the appeal within the stipulated time frame and the effect of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on the appeal process.

3. Facts of the Case:
The claimant, Pascalia Mwende Matheka, filed a notice of motion on 4th August 2020 seeking the release of approximately Kshs. 924,259 held in a joint account at Guaranty Trust Bank, stemming from a judgment delivered in her favor on 10th April 2019. The judgment awarded her Kshs. 720,000 plus costs and interest. A consent order on 10th December 2019 required the respondent, Silverbird Travel Plus Limited, to deposit the decretal sum in a joint account as a condition for allowing an appeal out of time. However, over seven months later, the respondent had not filed the appeal record, prompting the applicant to argue that the appeal was no longer viable and that she was facing financial hardship exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

4. Procedural History:
The case progressed as follows:
- The claimant filed an application seeking the release of the funds based on the absence of a filed appeal and her financial difficulties.
- The respondent opposed the application, arguing that a stay of execution was granted pending the appeal and that the court was functus officio regarding the consent order.
- Both parties submitted affidavits and legal arguments, leading to the court's consideration of the issues on 16th October 2020, culminating in a ruling dismissing the application.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, Sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act, and Section 34 of the Civil Procedure Act, which mandates the court to handle matters regarding the execution and satisfaction of decrees.
- Case Law: The court referenced *Mae Properties Limited v. Joseph Kibe & Planfarm Investments Limited*, Civil Appeal No. 201 of 2016, which established that failure to comply with appeal timelines results in the withdrawal of the notice of appeal. This precedent was pertinent in evaluating the status of the respondent's appeal.
- Application: The court determined that the respondent's failure to file the appeal within the required timeline rendered the appeal non-existent. Despite the applicant's financial distress, the court held that it could not disturb the stay of execution without allowing the respondent an opportunity to address the appeal's viability in the Court of Appeal. The court emphasized the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on judicial processes and the need for fairness in allowing the respondent to present their case.

6. Conclusion:
The court dismissed the application for the release of the decretal sum, ruling that the matter of the appeal should be resolved by the Court of Appeal. The court underscored the importance of adhering to procedural timelines and the necessity of allowing the respondent to pursue their appeal.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in this ruling, as it was a singular decision from Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya.

8. Summary:
The Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya ruled against Pascalia Mwende Matheka's application to release funds held in a joint account, citing the respondent's rights to pursue an appeal and the procedural implications of the COVID-19 pandemic. The decision emphasizes the court's role in maintaining procedural integrity while balancing the interests of both parties, highlighting the significant impact of timely legal action on the execution of court orders.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Pascalia-Mwende-Matheka-v-Silverbird-Travel-Plus-Limited--another-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2070_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries