Kowido v Speed Capital Limited (Cause 2460 of 2016) [2025] KEELRC 1417 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court refused to lift orders making company directors personally liable for a debt, even though their lawyer missed the hearing by mistake.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the orders of 28th November 2024, made in the absence of the applicant's counsel who mis-diarized the date, should be set aside
- 2.Whether the Registrar should compute the interest payable on the decretal sum to enable settlement
Key legal issues
#Whether ex parte orders made on a date taken in the presence of both parties should be set aside where counsel mis-diarized the date
The orders were not set aside; they merely echoed an earlier unappealed ruling of Mbaru J and were the inevitable consequence of the applicant's continued default.
Judgment was delivered in 2019 and never appealed. Execution proved difficult, prompting a 2022 application allowed by Mbaru J directing directors to attend for cross-examination and, in default, be held personally liable. The directors never appeared. The date of 28th November 2024 was taken in the presence of both parties. Setting aside orders that were the inevitable eventuality of the earlier ruling would serve no purpose.
Computation of interest on the decretal sum
Prayer 6 allowed; the parties to liaise with the Deputy Registrar to compute interest for purposes of payment.
The applicant did not challenge the legality of the orders but sought computation of the proper interest payable to allow the respondent to settle the decretal sum. The court found this prayer unopposed and reasonable, and directed computation of interest on the decretal sum for payment purposes.
Legal principles established
#- A party should not be punished for the fault of their advocate, but setting aside ex parte orders is discretionary and depends on the history and circumstances of the matter.
Court orders
#- 1.The Court will not set aside the orders of 28th November 2024
- 2.Prayer 6 of the Motion allowed - parties to liaise with the Deputy Registrar and compute the interest on the decretal sum for purposes of payment
- 3.Matter scheduled for mention on 30th June 2025 for compliance and further directions
- 4.No execution to proceed in the interim
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent powers of the Court to set aside ex parte orders and regulate its process (provision not stated in extract)
Relief refused
#Stay of execution / setting aside of the orders of 28th November 2024
The orders merely echoed the ruling of Mbaru J of 16th February 2023; the respondent never appealed and the directors never appeared for cross-examination; no purpose would be served by setting aside orders made in the absence of counsel who mis-diarized the date.
Costs
No costs order recorded in the judgment.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In the circumstances the Court will not set aside the orders of 28th November, 2024 but will allow prayer 6 of the Motion and direct that the parties herein liaise with Deputy Registrar of the Court and compute the interest on the decretal sum for purposes of payment of the amount due as prayed by the applicant.
For avoidance of doubt, no execution to proceed in the interim.
the Court ordered the named directors personally liable for the debts of the respondent and that execution do issue against them personally
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment does not state the names of the parties or the case number; identification is by roles only.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kowido v Speed Capital Limited (Cause 2460 of 2016) [2025] KEELRC 1417 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in extract. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1417/eng@2025-05-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.