Dzila v Kwale County Assembly Service Board & 6 others (Cause 21 of 2020) [2022] KEELRC 1401 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court confirmed it can enforce its own orders through contempt proceedings, even after delivering final judgment.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Functus officio and post-judgment jurisdiction
The Court is not functus officio; it retains jurisdiction to enforce its judgment, decree or order, including via contempt applications
The respondents argued the Court had made a final pronouncement and could not revisit the injunction. The claimant relied on post-judgment jurisdiction under sections 13 and 16 of the Employment and Labour Relations Act and on Samuel M.N. Mweru v National Land Commission, where Mativo J held that contempt applications to enforce a decree fall within valid post-judgment jurisdiction. The Court agreed and upheld that it could entertain the contempt prayer.
Res judicata regarding the injunction prayer
Prayer 2 for an injunction is res judicata, the 01.04.2022 order having conclusively dealt with injunctive relief and directed further recourse to the Court of Appeal
The Court noted the 01.04.2022 order expressly provided that the stay would lapse on 29.04.2022 and that further injunctive considerations lay with the Court of Appeal. That order had not been reviewed, and the claimant had in fact filed the relevant application in the Court of Appeal. The injunction prayer was therefore barred by res judicata and the judicial hierarchy doctrine, and was in any event overtaken by the withdrawal of the Court of Appeal application after the claimant's dismissal.
Legal principles established
#- A court retains post-judgment jurisdiction to enforce its decrees and orders, including through contempt proceedings
- A matter already decided and left to another court in the hierarchy is barred by res judicata and the doctrine of judicial hierarchy
Court orders
#- 1.The ruling delivered on 01.04.2022 but erroneously titled 'judgment' is corrected and rectified by deleting 'judgment' in the title and inserting 'Ruling'
- 2.Ground 1 of the preliminary objection fails - the Court enjoys post-judgment jurisdiction to determine prayer 3 on alleged contempt
- 3.Ground 2 of the preliminary objection is upheld - prayer 2 for injunction is barred by res judicata and overtaken by the Court of Appeal ruling of 06.06.2022
- 4.Parties at liberty to compromise the residual prayer 3 with a view of recording appropriate consent or directions
- 5.Each party to bear own costs of the preliminary objection
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 12(3)(iii)(viii) and 13 of the Employment and Labour Relations Act; sections 1A, 1B and 63(a)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Dzila v Kwale County Assembly Service Board & 6 others (Cause 21 of 2020) [2022] KEELRC 1401 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Cause No 21 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/1401/eng@2022-06-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.