Kenya Electrical Trades & Allied Workers Union v Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited [2018] KEELRC 1130 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court refused a state company's bid to restart a six-year-old workers' case, ruling changing lawyers does not entitle anyone to a fresh hearing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether new instructions to fresh Advocates justify a de novo hearing
No. The matter was not directed to start afresh; the Respondent's Advocates had access to pleadings and the trial Judge was unchanged.
The file was transferred to Mombasa to continue the hearing, not to start afresh. The Respondent filed a Statement of Response, showing it had the pleadings, and its own letters show it declined to pay for copies. Accepting the Respondent's position would mean a de novo hearing every time a party changes Advocates, causing endless delay in finalisation of claims.
Whether res judicata based on Cause Number 1788 of 2011 merits reopening
No. It is a new issue to be determined with the rest of the Claim after submissions, without reopening proceedings.
The Respondent never raised res judicata during the hearing of the Claimant's evidence. The court may not adjudicate issues already finally determined by another court, but the proper course is to consider the point in closing submissions now that Cause Number 1788 of 2011 has been brought to its attention, not to reopen and strike out peremptorily.
Whether the Respondent was denied the right to be heard
No. The Respondent filed a Statement of Response, fully participated at Nairobi, cross-examined the Claimant's main witness, and could have filed closing submissions.
The Respondent participated fully in proceedings at Nairobi, cross-examined the main witness at length, changed Advocates midstream with the Court's indulgence, and was allocated consecutive hearing days. Courts must not delay justice; a claim filed in 2012 must be brought to an end.
Legal principles established
#- A change of Advocates does not entitle a party to a hearing de novo; parties must supply their new Advocates with the pleadings
- A court must consider a relevant judgment on similar issues between the same parties brought to its attention before retirement to write judgment, to determine res judicata
Court orders
#- 1.The Application filed by the Respondent on 25th January 2018 is rejected
- 2.The Respondent shall file and serve its Closing Submissions, including submission on res judicata, within 14 days of this Ruling
- 3.The Claimant may file Supplementary Submissions focusing on res judicata, within 14 days of receiving Respondent's Submissions
- 4.Costs of the Application to the Claimant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Constitution and statute (not specifically cited in extract)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Electrical Trades & Allied Workers Union v Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited [2018] KEELRC 1130 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in extract (claim filed 2012). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/1130/eng@2018-09-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.