Kenya Union Of Commcercial Food And Allied Workers v National Water Conservation And Pipeline Corporation [2013] KEELRC 687 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court refused to pause a reinstatement order because the employer waited four months to ask and never followed the original orders.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether stay of execution pending appeal should be granted notwithstanding the delay in filing the application
The application was dismissed for inordinate and unexplained delay; even accounting for the court vacation, three months were unaccounted for.
The judgment was delivered on 28th September 2012 and the application was filed on 31st January 2013, four months later. Even deducting the court vacation from 21st December 2012 to 14th January 2013, three months remained unexplained. Delay, non-compliance with the earlier orders, and the absence of the lodged appeal from the application defeated the request for stay.
Whether the respondent's claim that the claimant's position had been filled justified stay
No - the judgment of 28th September 2012 had anticipated this by ordering reinstatement to her job 'or an equally suitable job'.
The court held the respondent had made no effort to comply with the original orders or engage the claimant meaningfully on deployment to a suitable position. As a public body, the respondent was obliged to manage public affairs with due diligence and the rule of law, and the Employment Act creates reinstatement as a remedy where the court finds it best available.
Legal principles established
#- A party is responsible for the conduct of its advocates, who act upon instructions from the client; mistakes of counsel cannot be wholly disowned where the client gave instructions.
- The reinstatement remedy under the Employment Act is available to an employee of a public body, which must be managed with due diligence and the rule of law.
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 28th January 2013 is dismissed
- 2.The respondent is directed to reinstate Lydia Kakenya Korir within the next 7 days as directed on 28th September 2012, with benefits due to date being inclusive
- 3.Costs awarded to the claimant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 16(1)(2) and Rule 27 of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Union Of Commcercial Food And Allied Workers v National Water Conservation And Pipeline Corporation [2013] KEELRC 687 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Cause No 802 of 2011. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2013/687/eng@2013-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.