By Andrew Kariuki

The Employment and Labour Relations Court in Nairobi has issued a garnishee order compelling the Kenya Civil Aviation Authority (KCAA) to pay Ksh2,221,104 to a former employee after finding that the authority failed to comply with a binding court judgment delivered in September 2025.

In a ruling dated April 22, 2026, the court allowed an application by the petitioner seeking enforcement of the decree, directing that the amount be paid directly from KCAA’s bank account held at Kenya Commercial Bank.

The matter arises from Petition No. E206 of 2024, in which Vivian Nyakerario Ongwae, who was represented by Lawyer Henry Kurauka, challenged the non-renewal of her employment contract by KCAA. In its earlier decision delivered on September 25, 2025, the court found that the authority’s actions were unlawful and in violation of her constitutional and labour rights.

In that judgment, the court held that the decision not to renew her contract was not only procedurally flawed but also substantively unjustified, noting that it had been communicated after the contract had already expired and without proper basis.

“The decision by the Respondent is capricious, irrational, unlawful, oppressive, unjust, unfair and unconstitutional,” the court stated in its findings.

The court further found that Ongwae had a legitimate expectation that her contract would be renewed, particularly in light of her performance and internal processes that had pointed towards continuation of her employment.

As a result, the court awarded her general damages equivalent to six months’ salary, quantified at Ksh2,221,104.

“The Petitioner is entitled to general damages equivalent to six (6) months salary… in the sum of Kshs. 2,221,104.00,” the judgment read.

In addition to the monetary award, the court also directed KCAA to renew her contract for a further three-year term and to pay salary arrears effective January 1, 2024.

Despite these clear orders, the petitioner returned to court seeking enforcement, stating that KCAA had failed to honour the judgment. In her application dated November 3, 2025, she sought, among other orders, that a garnishee order be made absolute to facilitate recovery of the decretal sum from KCAA’s bank account.

According to the ruling, the application was grounded on the fact that the judgment debtor had remained in default “despite numerous demands to satisfy the judgment of the court delivered on 25/9/2023.”

The court noted that the respondent did not file any plausible response to oppose the application, instead indicating that it had filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal seeking to set aside the judgment.

However, the court observed that the existence of an intended appeal did not in itself justify failure to comply with an existing court decree, particularly in the absence of any stay of execution.

“The Respondent has not filed any plausible response to the application while arguing that they have noted an appeal to the Court of Appeal,” the ruling noted.

The court was also informed that as at November 27, 2025, the account held by KCAA at Kenya Commercial Bank contained Ksh861,000,000, confirming that there were sufficient funds to satisfy the decree.

In its determination, the court found that KCAA’s conduct amounted to outright defiance of a lawful court order.

“The Respondent is guilty of blatant disregard of the court judgment and decree without any justification,” the court ruled.

Consequently, the court allowed the application and issued a garnishee order absolute, directing that Ksh2,221,104 be paid to the petitioner directly from KCAA’s Bank Account held at Kenya Commercial Bank.

“A garnishee order absolute is issued to pay a sum of Kshs. 2,221,104.00 to the Petitioner,” the court ordered.

The ruling was delivered in open court in Nairobi by Justice Mathews Nduma and signed by Dr. Gakeri J., in the presence of counsel representing the respective parties.

The decision effectively enforces the earlier judgment and underscores the court’s position that parties must comply with court orders unless lawfully set aside or stayed, reaffirming the principle that judgments of the court are not optional.