Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in the judgment· [2021] KEELRC 1415 (KLR)

Joseph Angwenyi Ongoro v Regal Pharmaceuticals Limited [2021] KEELRC 1415 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
10 June 2021
1,051 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court refused to reinstate a suit dismissed for inaction, ruling that once a decision is made, the court cannot reopen it except in exceptional cases.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant filed an application dated 8th March, 2021 under sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 6 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking to set aside orders of 26th February, 2019 dismissing his suit for want of prosecution and to reinstate the suit. The suit, filed on 10th April, 2015, had been listed for hearing several times without proceeding. On 26th February, 2019, following a Notice to Show Cause issued on 13th February, 2019 under Rule 16 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016, a representative (Mr Otieno) held brief for the claimant's advocate, who was said to be in Marsabit High Court; no affidavit responding to the notice was filed and the claimant was absent, so the suit was dismissed. The respondent, through the replying affidavit of its director Rohin Vora, opposed the application, describing the claimant as an indolent litigant. The court found the supporting affidavit contradicted the earlier court representation - claiming Mavoko High Court, which does not exist - and that no affidavit from Mr Otieno was attached. The delay of 25 months and 10 days in filing the application was unexplained, and the claimant filed no affidavit showing interest in the suit. The court held it was functus officio absent fraud, mistake or fundamental irregularity, none of which was established. The application was dismissed as an abuse of court process with costs to the respondent on 10th June, 2021.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether good cause was shown to set aside the dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution

Holding

No good cause was shown; the claimant's advocate gave contradictory and misleading explanations for absence, the claimant himself was absent, and the delay of 25 months and 10 days in moving the court was unexplained.

Reasoning

The court had dismissed the suit on 26th February, 2019 after a Notice to Show Cause. The claimant's advocate then claimed to have been at Mavoko High Court, contradicting the earlier representation in court that he was at Marsabit High Court; no such High Court exists at Mavoko. No affidavit from the advocate who attended was filed, and the claimant's own silence and inaction over two years demonstrated indolence.

p. 1
02

Whether the court could reopen the matter after delivering its dismissal decision

Holding

The court stood functus officio; only exceptional circumstances such as fraud, mistake or fundamental irregularity would permit reopening, none of which existed.

Reasoning

The court reiterated the functus officio doctrine, holding that once a decision is delivered the court ceases to be seized of the matter. The application disclosed none of the recognized exceptions and was therefore framed as an abuse of court process warranting dismissal with costs.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A court becomes functus officio after delivering its decision and cannot reopen the matter except in exceptional cases such as fraud, mistake or fundamental irregularity
  • A suit in which no action has been taken for one year may be dismissed for want of prosecution under Rule 16 of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules, 2016 if no reasonable cause is shown

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 8th March, 2021 by the claimant is dismissed with costs to the respondent
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 6 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Joseph Angwenyi Ongoro v Regal Pharmaceuticals Limited [2021] KEELRC 1415 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/1415/eng@2021-06-10

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