DANIEL MAGETOGESUKA V CATERING LEVY TRUSTEES [2013] KEELRC 305 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Industrial Court dismissed a worker's review application because his union, not him, owned the original case — and his grounds were too vague.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Locus standi of the applicant to bring a review application
The applicant lacked locus standi because the original cause was brought and prosecuted by his union, KUDHEIA, and decided in its favour
The court noted that the initial cause, the subject of the review application, was instituted through the grievant's union KUDHEIA. At finalisation the union was in charge of the matter and the court decided in its favour. The grievant was therefore a technical stranger to the proceedings and could not purport to file and prosecute a review application in person. On this ground alone the application had to fail without analysis of its merits.
Clarity of the grounds for review
The application failed for want of clarity, as the concept of 'new developments' relied upon was not clearly expressed in the pleadings
The court observed at the outset that the notion of 'new developments' advanced as the basis for review was not clearly expressed in the pleadings. The grounds lacked clarity such that the basis of the claim and application could not be discerned from the face of the application. The court held that on this ground alone the application would fail, before going on to find the more fundamental defect of locus standi.
Legal principles established
#- A grievant whose cause was prosecuted by his union lacks locus standi to prosecute an application for review in that matter in person
Court orders
#- 1.The application for review of the award dated 31st October, 2012 is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 16 of the Industrial Court Act and Rule 32 of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "DANIEL MAGETOGESUKA V CATERING LEVY TRUSTEES [2013] KEELRC 305 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Industrial Cause Number 11 of 2006 (Application for Review dated 31st October, 2012). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2013/305/eng@2013-05-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.