Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCOtherApplication dated 20th June 2013 for review of a ruling delivered on 15th November 2012· [2014] KEELRC 455 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Employees of Voluntary & Charitable Organizations (KUEVACO) v De La Rue Currency & Security Print Limited (Cause 641 of 2010) [2014] KEELRC 455 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
6 May 2014
297 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 declined to review an earlier ruling, telling the parties to argue their issues at the main hearing instead of through more preliminary applications.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Employment and Labour Relations Court delivered by Lady Justice Maureen Onyango on 6th May 2014, determining an application for review filed on 20th June 2013 seeking review of a ruling of the same court delivered on 15th November 2012. The application was grounded on three bases: mistakes or errors apparent on the face of the record, need for clarification of the ruling, and sufficient reasons for review. A memorandum of review was filed on 5th April 2013, and the Claimant responded by memorandum dated 21st June 2013. The applicant sought allowance of the review, setting aside of the ruling in its entirety, and fixation of the case for substantive hearing. The court noted that in the earlier ruling, which had dismissed the Respondent's preliminary objection, it had already made substantially the same order directing the case to full hearing. The judge observed that the issues raised in both the review application and the response would be resolved if the case were heard substantively with evidence called by the parties. Applying the principle that interlocutory applications that can be addressed at the hearing should be discouraged unless injustice would result, the court declined to make substantive findings on the review. It ordered that the issues raised in the application for review be raised in the substantive case during the hearing or in final submissions, and directed the parties to fix the case for substantive hearing. No costs order was made and no authorities were cited.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the application for review of the ruling of 15th November 2012 should be allowed

Holding

The court declined to make substantive findings on the review, directing instead that the issues raised be ventilated at the substantive hearing

Reasoning

The judge observed that the issues raised in the review application and the Claimant's response would be resolved if the case proceeded to full hearing with evidence called by the parties. Noting that the earlier ruling had already directed the matter to full hearing, the court considered that interlocutory applications which can be addressed at the hearing should be discouraged, as they cause delay and detract from substantive justice. Accordingly, the issues were referred to the trial.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • Interlocutory applications that can be resolved at the hearing should be discouraged to avoid delay and promote substantive justice

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The issues raised in the application for review shall be raised in the substantive case during the hearing and/or in the final submissions
  2. 2.No substantive findings made on the application for review
  3. 3.Parties directed to fix the case for substantive hearing
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent review jurisdiction of the court (grounds of errors apparent on the face of the record, need for clarification, and sufficient reasons for review)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Employees of Voluntary & Charitable Organizations (KUEVACO) v De La Rue Currency & Security Print Limited (Cause 641 of 2010) [2014] KEELRC 455 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Application dated 20th June 2013 for review of a ruling delivered on 15th November 2012. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2014/455/eng@2014-05-06

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