Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCStruck OutCause No. 380 of 2018 (consolidating Causes Nos. 381-386 of 2018)· [2019] KEELRC 1098 (KLR)

John Mwendwa Ali v Kalu Works Limited [2019] KEELRC 1098 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
18 July 2019
JRJames Rika
525 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Seven Kenyan employees lost their entire employment claims because their lawyers filed unsigned court documents — procedural details can be fatal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Seven related claims by former employees of Kalu Works Limited (Causes Nos. 380-386 of 2018) sought judgment for terminal benefits and compensation for unfair termination. The Respondent filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection on 4th February 2019, contending that the Statements of Claim were not signed by the Claimants' Advocates as required by Rule 6(a) of the Employment & Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules 2016, and asked that they be struck out with costs. The Claimants responded that their Statements of Claim were duly signed before filing. The court consolidated the seven files under Cause No. 380 of 2018. On the evidence, the court found that at the time the objection was argued, the Statements of Claim in Causes 380 and 385 bore no Advocates' signatures, while the other five were indicated as signed on 26th April 2018. Critically, certified copies of all Statements of Claim, requested by the Respondent from the Deputy Registrar before filing the objection, were all unsigned - conclusively establishing that the claims were unsigned at filing. The court inferred that the Claimants' Advocates had accessed the court files and signed some Statements after the default was raised, in a bid to remedy it. Holding that the unsigned Statements of Claim had no formal validity in law, the court struck out all 7 claims and awarded costs to the Respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Formal validity of unsigned Statements of Claim

Holding

Statements of Claim not signed at the time of filing by the Claimant or Advocate are of no formal validity and liable to be struck out

Reasoning

Rule 6(a) of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules 2016 requires a Statement of Claim to be signed by the Claimant or his Advocate. Certified copies obtained from the court registry by the Respondent before filing the Preliminary Objection were all unsigned, conclusively showing the claims were unsigned at filing. The court found the Advocates had later accessed the files and signed some Statements in a bid to cure the default, which could not validate the defective filings. Accordingly all 7 claims were struck out with costs.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A Statement of Claim must be signed by the Claimant or their Advocate under Rule 6(a) of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules 2016; an unsigned Statement of Claim has no formal validity in law
  • A party cannot remedy a procedural default retroactively by accessing court files and signing documents after the default has been raised

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The files listed at paragraph 1 of the Ruling are consolidated, to be dealt with under Cause No. 380 of 2018
  2. 2.The 7 Claims are hereby struck out
  3. 3.Costs to the Respondent
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment & Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules 2016, Rule 6(a)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "John Mwendwa Ali v Kalu Works Limited [2019] KEELRC 1098 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Cause No. 380 of 2018 (consolidating Causes Nos. 381-386 of 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/1098/eng@2019-07-18

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