Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCOtherNot stated in the judgment

Kenya National Private Security Workers’ Union v Patriotic Group of Companies (Cause E006 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2372 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
14 August 2025
287 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan employment court confirmed that once you're allowed to execute a costs order, you don't need another ruling — just go enforce it.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short procedural ruling of the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri by Onesmus N Makau J, delivered on 14th August 2025 via Teams video conferencing with the parties' consent, they having waived compliance with Rule 28(3) of the ELRC Procedure Rules. The background is a ruling of 26th March 2025 in which the court set aside a judgment previously entered against the respondent, granted it leave to file a Response to the Claim, awarded the claimant throw-away costs of Kshs.15,000 payable within 21 days, and gave the claimant liberty to execute in default. At a mention on 6th May 2025 the claimant protested non-payment; counsel for the respondent promised to pay and the matter was fixed for mention on 2nd July 2025. On that date only the claimant's counsel attended and asked the court to rule on the unpaid costs. The court noted that the compliance period had lapsed without either payment of the throw-away costs or filing of pleadings, and held that a further ruling was unnecessary because liberty to execute had already been granted in the March ruling. The claimant was left to execute for the costs and to fix the suit for hearing. No new costs order was made and no case authorities were cited.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the court should rule again on the unpaid throw-away costs awarded in the ruling of 26th March 2025
  2. 2.What directions should issue where the respondent has defaulted on payment of costs and on filing pleadings

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a further ruling was required to enforce unpaid throw-away costs

Holding

No; the claimant must execute under the liberty already granted

Reasoning

The court recalled that its ruling of 26th March 2025 set aside the earlier judgment, granted leave to file a Response and awarded throw-away costs of Kshs.15,000 with liberty to execute in default. The time for compliance lapsed without payment or filing of pleadings. Since execution was already permitted, a further ruling would duplicate the existing remedy. The claimant was directed to execute and fix the suit for hearing.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a party has already been granted liberty to execute for costs awarded in a ruling, a fresh application for a further ruling on the same costs is unnecessary.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.No further ruling on the unpaid costs; the claimant is to proceed to execute for the throw-away costs of Kshs.15,000 as already permitted by the ruling of 26th March 2025
  2. 2.The claimant is at liberty to fix the suit for hearing

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
ELRC Procedure Rules, Rule 28(3) (delivery of rulings); original ELRC jurisdiction (specific provision not stated)

Relief refused

#

A further ruling directing payment of the throw-away costs

The liberty to execute had already been granted; a further ruling would be unnecessary

p. 1

Costs

No new costs order; earlier award of throw-away costs of Kshs.15,000 against the respondent stands, with liberty to execute.

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.

I have noted that the time given to the respondent to comply with the said ruling has since lapsed without filing of pleadings or payment of throw away costs to the claimant.
p. 1default by respondent
In the ruling of 26th March 2025, I gave claimant the liberty to execute and therefore asking for further ruling is unnecessary.
p. 1execution of costs
the ball is now in the claimant’s court to execute for the costs and fix the suit for hearing.
p. 1disposition and directions

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The judgment does not state the case number, party names or the subject claim, identifying the parties only as claimant and respondent.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya National Private Security Workers’ Union v Patriotic Group of Companies (Cause E006 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2372 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2372/eng@2025-08-14

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.