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. 90 of 2019 (Originally Nairobi Cause No. 2118 of 2016)· [2021] KEELRC 2390 (KLR)

Sammy Erick Njeru v Destaings Nyenyi Nyongesa & 6 others [2021] KEELRC 2390 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
8 December 2021
RSRadido Stephen
780 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan employment case was struck out because it challenged only a suspension that had since become a completed termination, making the lawsuit pointless.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is Ruling No. 2 in an employment cause filed on 14 October 2016 by Sammy Erick Njeru against trustees of the Maseno University Retirement Benefits Scheme, challenging his suspension and intended unfair termination. Earlier, on 25 November 2016, the Court had dismissed the Claimant's interlocutory Motion seeking to interdict the suspension and directed that the disciplinary process proceed. The process culminated in termination of the Claimant's employment on 6 February 2017 and payment of terminal dues around September 2017. Before the full hearing, the Respondents filed a Motion on 16 April 2021 seeking declarations that the suit was compromised by agreement or conduct of the Claimant and that a decree to that effect issue. The Claimant opposed, contending his terminal dues had not been paid and no compromise discussions had occurred. The Court observed that the substratum of the action as pleaded was the suspension pending investigations and disciplinary action; since that process had run its course to termination, and the Memorandum of Claim was never amended to reflect the changed circumstances, the Cause had become moot. Taking evidence and determining it would be a mere academic exercise. The Court therefore struck out the Cause as overtaken by events, with no order on costs. The Respondents' request to have the suit declared compromised was not granted in those terms; the disposition was a strike-out.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Cause was compromised or had become moot

Holding

The Cause was not declared compromised; it was struck out because the substratum of the action - the suspension and disciplinary process - had been overtaken by termination and payment of terminal dues

Reasoning

The Claimant's Memorandum of Claim challenged only the suspension pending investigations. The Court had declined to interdict the disciplinary process, which then proceeded to termination on 6 February 2017, and terminal dues were paid in September 2017. The Claimant never amended the Memorandum of Claim to reflect these events, so the action's substratum was fundamentally altered, rendering it moot and academic.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where events have overtaken the substratum of an action, taking evidence and determining it would be a mere academic exercise and the cause becomes moot

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Cause, having been overtaken by events, was struck out with no order on costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment causes (Cause No. 90 of 2019)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Sammy Erick Njeru v Destaings Nyenyi Nyongesa & 6 others [2021] KEELRC 2390 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Cause No. 90 of 2019 (Originally Nairobi Cause No. 2118 of 2016). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/2390/eng@2021-12-08

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