Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCStruck OutELRC Petition No. 30 of 2017· [2018] KEELRC 1172 (KLR)

Patrick Wanyonyi Khaemba v Teachers Service Commission & 2 others [2018] KEELRC 1172 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
20 September 2018
252 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 court struck out a teacher's second case against the TSC because it repeated an earlier case already awaiting judgment.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
In this Employment and Labour Relations Court petition at Kisumu, the Respondents applied for the striking out of Petition No. 30 of 2017 on the ground that it duplicated an earlier petition. The court, considering the application dated 4th September 2017, the Replying affidavit and submissions, found that the petitioner had previously filed a constitutional petition (Kisumu ELRC Petition No. 23 of 2013/2015, dated 8th October 2015) raising the same facts and issues arising from his interdiction by the Teachers Service Commission, and that this earlier petition was still pending judgment. The court held that any new matters should have been raised by amendment of the existing suit rather than by filing a fresh petition between the same parties on the same facts. Relying on the sub judice principle and the court's duty to prevent abuse of its process by deterring a multiplicity of suits, as illustrated in Okiya Omtatah Okoiti v Ministry of Transport & Infrastructure [2016] eKLR, the court directed that all pending issues in the present petition be determined in the earlier petition No. 23 of 2015 and struck out the petition for duplicity as an abuse of the court process, with costs to the Respondents. The petitioner appeared in person; the Respondents were represented by Mr. Calvin Anyuor.

Key legal issues

#
01

Multiplicity of suits / sub judice

Holding

The petition was struck out as duplicative of Kisumu ELRC Petition No. 23 of 2015, which raised the same facts and issues between the same parties and was pending judgment

Reasoning

The court found that the petitioner had already filed a constitutional petition raising the same facts arising from his interdiction by the TSC. Filing a fresh petition rather than amending the existing one amounted to an abuse of process. The sub judice rule protects the administration of justice by deterring multiple suits, so all pending issues would be determined in the earlier petition.

p. 1
02

Proper procedural route for new matters

Holding

New matters arising from the same facts should be raised by amendment of the existing suit, not by filing a fresh petition

Reasoning

The court held that because the earlier petition between the same parties was already before the court and pending judgment, any additional matters the petitioner wished to agitate had to be introduced by amendment rather than by instituting a second petition on the same set of facts.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • The court has a responsibility to stop abuse of its process by deterring multiplicity of suits, per the sub judice rule
  • A litigant raising new matters arising from the same facts between the same parties should amend the existing suit rather than file a new one

Court orders

#
  1. 1.All pending issues in the petition to be determined in Kisumu ELRC Petition No. 23 of 2015
  2. 2.The Petition is struck out for duplicity as an abuse of the court process
  3. 3.Costs of the petition awarded to the Respondents

Authorities

#

Cases cited (1)

  • Okiya Omtatah Okoiti & another v Ministry of Transport & infrastructure & 4 others
    [2016] eKLR (Petition No. 548 of 2015)
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2) Constitution (ELRC jurisdiction) - not expressly stated in the excerpt; petition filed under the court's constitutional petition jurisdiction

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Patrick Wanyonyi Khaemba v Teachers Service Commission & 2 others [2018] KEELRC 1172 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). ELRC Petition No. 30 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/1172/eng@2018-09-20

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