Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedNot disclosed in the judgment (two consolidated suits filed 17.6.2015; motions dated 31.8.2015)· [2015] KEELRC 431 (KLR)

Alfonso Katheka Munyali & another v Council Of The Kenya School Of Government & 3 others [2015] KEELRC 431 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
9 October 2015
OMONESMUS MAKAU
1,293 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's employment court ruled that newly appointed campus directors must be joined in a lawsuit challenging their appointments because the outcome directly affects them.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Two claimants, describing themselves as permanent and pensionable Campus Directors of the Kenya School of Government (KSG) Mombasa and Matuga campuses, sued on 17 June 2015 seeking reinstatement orders, a declaration that the appointment of new campus directors was null and void, and prohibitory orders restraining their deployment elsewhere. The suits were consolidated and the court granted interlocutory injunctions barring the installation of the new directors. Before the hearing, the newly appointed directors filed separate notices of motion dated 31 August 2015 seeking to be joined as parties whose presence was necessary for the effective adjudication of the suit, arguing that the injunction orders adversely affected them and that they were entitled to a hearing under Articles 48 and 50 of the Constitution. The claimants opposed, contending that the applicants had no identifiable legal interest, held general (not campus-specific) appointments, and should litigate separately against their employer. The sole issue was whether the applicants should be added as necessary parties. Relying on the Tanzanian Court of Appeal decision in Tang Gas Distributors Ltd v Said, the court held that although a decision in the suit would not nullify the applicants' appointments, it could adversely affect their deployment, and joinder was necessary for the effectual and complete determination of all questions. The motions dated 31 August 2015 were allowed; the applicants were added as respondents and granted 14 days to file and serve their responses. No costs order was made. (Ruling delivered by Onesmus Makau J in Mombasa on 9 October 2015.)

Key legal issues

#
01

Joinder of applicants as necessary parties

Holding

The applicants are necessary parties because the outcome of the suit may adversely affect them, and they are entitled to a hearing before judgment.

Reasoning

The court found that although a decision in the claimants' suit would not nullify the applicants' appointments, it would deprive them of their deployment to the Mombasa and Matuga campuses. Following the Tanzanian Court of Appeal decision in Tang Gas Distributors Ltd v Said, the court held that joinder is proper where necessary to effectually and completely settle all questions in the suit, and that persons likely to be adversely affected are entitled to be heard under Articles 48 and 50 of the Constitution.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A court may add a person not originally a party as a party to a suit where necessary for the effectual and complete adjudication of the questions in the suit, at any stage of the proceedings.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The two Motions by the applicants dated 31.8.2015 are allowed as prayed
  2. 2.The applicants are added as respondents to the suit
  3. 3.The applicants are at liberty to file and serve responses to the claimants' suits within 14 days from the date of the ruling

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 48, 50, 159

Cases cited (1)

  • Tang Gas Distributors Ltd –vs– Said and others
    C.A No. 68 of 2011 (2014) BEA
Jurisdiction invoked
Court's inherent/civil procedure power to add necessary parties, invoked alongside Articles 48, 50 and 159 of the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Alfonso Katheka Munyali & another v Council Of The Kenya School Of Government & 3 others [2015] KEELRC 431 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Not disclosed in the judgment (two consolidated suits filed 17.6.2015; motions dated 31.8.2015). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/431/eng@2015-10-09

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