Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in the extract (Motion dated 5 March 2021)· [2022] KEELRC 857 (KLR)

Joseph K Chepkwony v Kenya Defence Forces & another [2022] KEELRC 857 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
9 February 2022
RSRadido Stephen
452 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

#

A Kenyan court dismissed a bid to revive late court submissions, confirming that unpaid filing fees and missed deadlines cannot be fixed through review.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicant, Major (Rtd) Joseph K Chepkwony, moved the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu by a Motion dated 5 March 2021 seeking review and setting aside of a ruling dated 2 February 2021 together with all consequential orders, and an order deeming his written submissions dated 17 December 2020 as filed upon payment of the requisite fee. He contended that he had emailed his submissions to the Court on 17 December 2021 but the registry failed to place them on the file, and that this omission was an error apparent on the face of the record which led the Court to make adverse orders against him. The respondents did not file a response or submissions. The Court (Radido Stephen, Judge) found the application without merit on four grounds: first, no ruling was delivered on the date cited, the only determination on record being a judgment of 10 February 2021, and the Court assumed the applicant erred as to the date; second, the applicant had not demonstrated payment of the requisite filing fees, without which submissions could not be deemed on record; third, he had been directed to file and serve submissions by 4 December 2021 and offered no explanation for the delay; and fourth, he did not show that the Court had failed to consider any issue raised in the submissions. The Motion was dismissed with no order on costs, the respondents having filed no response. The ruling was delivered virtually, dated and signed in Kisumu on 9 February 2022.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether failure of the registry to place submissions on the file constituted an error apparent on the face of the record justifying review

Holding

The application failed; the applicant did not demonstrate any error, having neither paid filing fees, complied with the filing timeline, nor shown that the Court overlooked any issue in the submissions

Reasoning

The Court noted it had not delivered the ruling identified by the applicant, only a judgment of 10 February 2021, and assumed a dating error. It found the applicant had not paid filing fees for the submissions, had missed the court-ordered deadline of 4 December 2021 without explanation, and had not shown the Court failed to consider any identified issue. On these grounds the review application was found to be without merit and dismissed.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Written submissions can only be deemed properly on record upon payment of the requisite filing fees
  • A party seeking review must demonstrate that the court failed to consider an issue or that there was an error apparent on the face of the record

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Motion dated 5 March 2021 is dismissed with no order on costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent review jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (not expressly cited in the ruling)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Joseph K Chepkwony v Kenya Defence Forces & another [2022] KEELRC 857 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in the extract (Motion dated 5 March 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/857/eng@2022-02-09

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