Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2015] KEELRC 1238 (KLR)

Beatrice Angeso Onyuro v Niti Distributors Limited [2015] KEELRC 1238 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
4 March 2015
1,555 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan employment court set aside a default judgment against an employer, but only after it paid Kshs. 25,000 in costs, and an NSSF audit order still stands.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi, delivered by Nzioki wa Makau J on 4th March 2015, on the Respondent/Applicant's Notice of Motion dated 8th December 2014 seeking to set aside the default judgment entered on 12th June 2014 and the final judgment delivered on 15th October 2014. The Applicant, through its Senior Manager Operations Manish Talati, contended that service was improper because the person allegedly served, a Mr. Manish, was out of the country and was not a principal officer of the company, relying on Section 20 of the Civil Procedure Act, Order 5 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 and the Companies Act. The Claimant/Respondent, filing only written submissions, maintained that service was proper under Section 391(1) of the Companies Act and invoked Mbogo v Shah, urging dismissal of the application. The court reviewed the settled principles in Shah v Mbogo, CMC Holdings v Nzioki and Patel v EA Cargo Handling Services Ltd. While noting gaps in the Applicant's proof - the passport exit page was not attached and no security was offered - the court found triable issues had emerged and, in the interest of justice, set aside the default and final judgments on terms: the Respondent was to pay throwaway costs of Kshs. 25,000/- before filing appearance and defence, after which the suit would proceed to hearing. The NSSF audit portion of the judgment was left undisturbed.

Key legal issues

#
01

Properness of service on the company

Holding

Service was not conclusively established as proper; the Claimant did not establish that the office where service was effected was the registered office

Reasoning

Section 391(1) of the Companies Act permits service on an officer, by registered post, or by leaving documents at the registered office. The Claimant did not prove that the place of service was the registered office, and the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 raise the threshold for service of summons. The Respondent's proof that its deponent was out of the country was itself incomplete.

p. 2
02

Exercise of discretion to set aside default judgment

Holding

Judgment set aside on terms despite gaps in the Respondent's proof, because triable issues emerged and justice required that the Respondent be allowed to defend

Reasoning

Applying Shah v Mbogo, CMC Holdings v Nzioki and Patel v EA Cargo Handling, the court's main concern is doing justice. Although the passport exit page and proof of absence of a principal officer were not produced, and no security was tendered, the draft defence raised triable issues warranting setting aside on terms of throwaway costs.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The discretion to set aside an ex parte judgment is exercised to avoid injustice or hardship from accident, inadvertence or excusable mistake, not to assist a party who deliberately obstructed justice
  • In setting aside an ex parte judgment the court considers both the reasons for default and whether the proposed defence raises triable issues

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Default judgment entered on 12th June 2014 and final judgment delivered on 15th October 2014 set aside on terms
  2. 2.Respondent to pay throwaway costs of Kshs. 25,000/- to the Claimant before appearance and defence can be filed
  3. 3.Suit to be set down for hearing after the close of pleadings at the Registry in the normal manner
  4. 4.The part of the judgment ordering an NSSF audit of the Respondent to ensure payment of statutory deductions stands

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSection 20
  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010Order 5 Rule 3
  • Companies ActSection 2
  • Companies ActSection 391(1)

Cases cited (8)

  • Yamko Yadpaz Industries Limited v Kalka Flowers Limited
    Nairobi HCCC 591 of 2012 (unreported)
  • Kamau Mwangi v Wambui Kariuki
    [2012] eKLR
  • Lal Chand Shah & Another v Kenindia Assurance
    Nairobi HCCC 981 of 2003
  • Mbogo v Shah
    (1968) EA 93
  • Shah v Mbogo
    [1967] EA 116
  • CMC Holdings v Nzioki
    [2004] 1 KLR 173
  • Patel v EA Cargo Handling Services Ltd
    [1974] EA 75
  • Halai & Another v Thorton & Turpin (1963) Ltd
    [1990] KLR 365
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent discretion to set aside default judgment under the Civil Procedure Act and Civil Procedure Rules 2010

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Beatrice Angeso Onyuro v Niti Distributors Limited [2015] KEELRC 1238 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/1238/eng@2015-03-04

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