Michael Rugara Wambugu v Kenya Red Cross [2016] KEELRC 743 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment claim stayed dismissed because the claimant waited 14 months to seek review and had no proof his lawyer was in another court.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Burden of proving counsel's engagement elsewhere on the hearing date
The Claimant failed to discharge it; no cause list or court file extract was exhibited to prove his advocate was before Emukule J on 4 December 2014
The Claimant asserted in the supporting affidavit that his advocate Mr. Githui was before Emukule J in a succession cause on the hearing date. The Court held that such an assertion required documentary proof, and the absence of any exhibited cause list or extract of court file notes undermined the application.
Whether the Cause was stayed pending the related criminal trial
No explicit stay order existed; Ongaya J's notes of 3 June 2014 merely noted the pending criminal case and fixed hearing for 4 December 2014
The Court examined the notes and directions taken by Ongaya J on 3 June 2014, which recorded only that the related criminal case was ongoing and that the cause would be heard on 4 December 2014. From those notes there was no explicit order staying the hearing of the Cause.
Whether the 14-month delay in seeking review was inordinate
Yes; the delay from 4 December 2014 to 22 February 2016 was unexplained and did not merit the exercise of discretion in the Claimant's favour
The cause was dismissed on 4 December 2014 and the review application was only presented on 22 February 2016, some 14 months later. The Claimant offered no explanation for this delay, and the Court found it inordinate and fatal to the motion.
Legal principles established
#- Even where a matter is stayed, a party and counsel must still attend court or make alternative arrangements for representation
- Assertions of counsel's court engagements must be supported by documentary evidence such as a cause list or court file notes
Court orders
#- 1.The motion dated 18 February 2016 dismissed
- 2.No order as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent power of the Employment and Labour Relations Court to review its own orders (motion under the Court's review jurisdiction; specific provision not cited)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Michael Rugara Wambugu v Kenya Red Cross [2016] KEELRC 743 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Not stated in the judgment (Cause fixed for hearing 4 December 2014; related to Nakuru Criminal Case No. 857 of 2013). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/743/eng@2016-09-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.