Republic v Machakos County Assembly Service Board & 2 others; Mutisya & 16 others (Ex parte Applicants)
The bottom line
#The Employment Court ordered Machakos County Assembly to pay 17 former staff Ksh. 37.7 million in terminal dues within 90 days, with interest.
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 respondents should be compelled by mandamus to settle the decree and Certificate of Orders of Ksh. 37,716,975.75 with interest from Machakos ELRC No. 4 of 2018 (consolidated with 106 others)
- 2.Whether the court should fix a timeline for payment and monitor compliance
- 3.Whether the respondents' intended appeal or budgetary constraints justify non-payment
Key legal issues
#Whether mandamus lies to compel payment of a decree against a county assembly service board
Mandamus issued to compel payment of the decretal sum with interest within 90 days.
Valid decrees and a Certificate of Order Against the Government were served; demands were made and not contested; no compliance followed. The respondents' accounting officers have a statutory duty under section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act to pay upon service of decrees, and their failure was wilful and deliberate.
Whether an intended appeal or absence of budgetary allocation excuses non-payment
Neither excuse avails the respondents.
No appeal has actually been filed - only a Notice of Appeal that remains an unactualised intention - and no stay of execution is in place. Budgetary constraints do not extinguish the legal duty; the respondents had since June 2023 to plan and budget for the decree but did not.
Whether wilful non-compliance with court orders warrants enforcement measures
The court found wilful and deliberate disobedience and put in place monitoring with personal attendance consequences.
Relying on Supreme Court authority, the court held that deliberate refusal to comply with lawful orders demeans the integrity and authority of courts and derides the rule of law, and must not be allowed. Non-compliance since the 2022 judgment and 2023 tabulations was established and uncontroverted.
Legal principles established
#- Courts have inherent power to enforce compliance with their lawful orders.
- Deliberate refusal by a party, including government, to comply with lawful court orders is contempt of court.
- A Notice of Appeal that is not actualised does not amount to a filed appeal and cannot defeat execution.
Court orders
#- 1.Respondents directed to pay Ksh. 37,716,975.75 to the ex parte applicants within 90 days from the date of the ruling
- 2.The sum to bear interest at court rates from 21 June 2023 until paid in full, with the court monitoring the payment process
- 3.At the lapse of 90 days, parties to report to court full compliance; failing which personal attendance of the 3rd respondent, Anne M. Kiusya and the 2nd respondent is directed
- 4.Mention on 18 January 2027
- 5.Costs of the application to the ex parte applicants
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 53 Rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules; judicial review entrenched in the Constitution
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.
The respondents are hereby directed to pay the sum of Ksh. 37,716,975.75 to the ex parte applicants within 90 days from the date hereof. The sum shall bear interest at court rates from 21 June 2023 until paid in full.
At the lapse of the 90 days, the parties shall report to the court full compliance. Where this is not adequately addressed, the court directs the personal attendance of the 3rd respondent and Anne M. Kiusya, together with the 2nd respondent.
Costs of the instant application to the ex parte applicants.
Contemnors demean the integrity and authority of courts and deride the rule of law. This must not be allowed.
a money decree is not a complex issue as the 3rd respondent asserts. There should either be an offer to pay or an election not to pay.
Issues in the judgment
#Determination addresses contempt/committal though the application sought only mandamus and payment timeline.
Conflicting dates for service of the Certificate of Order Against the Government.
Reference to orders of 14 March 2024 compelling payment conflicts with the 14 October 2022 judgment date.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Machakos County Assembly Service Board & 2 others; Mutisya & 16 others (Ex parte Applicants)", Case Analysis (2026). Judicial Review Application E003 of 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2668/eng@2026-09-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.