Mwangi v Family Bank Limited (Cause 331 of 2014) [2022] KEELRC 1516 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court refused to remove documents from the case record because the claimant's own lawyer had consented to their production without objection.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether documents produced as exhibits with counsel's consent can be expunged from the record
No. Exhibits once produced become part of the court record; there is no law permitting their recall or destruction at the instance of a party who consented to their production
The court found that the impugned documents were produced in the presence of the Claimant's counsel, who was specifically asked whether he objected and answered no. Once admitted, exhibits became the property of the court. The Claimant had known of the documents since 2014 and filed no supplementary affidavit to contest that. The court distinguished the authorities relied on and found no law supporting expungement.
Whether the application survived being grounded on repealed rules and unparticularised constitutional articles
The application should have been dismissed for lack of proper legal foundation, but the court proceeded on merits under the injunction to dispense justice without undue regard to technicalities, and found it without merit
The Claimant relied on Articles 159 and 50 of the Constitution without particularising the specific provisions, and on the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules, 2010 which were repealed by the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016. Notwithstanding these defects, the court invoked Section 3 of the ELRC Act to interrogate the merits and found the application hollow.
Legal principles established
#- Once a document is produced as an exhibit it becomes part of the judicial record, the property of the court, to be evaluated for veracity together with the other evidence; production does not of itself prove its contents
- A party who consents to the production of documents cannot later seek their expungement; such a late objection is an afterthought that will not be entertained
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of motion dated 21st January 2022 seeking expungement of six documents is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the Respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 3(1) and (2) of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011; Articles 159 and 50 of the Constitution invoked by the applicant
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mwangi v Family Bank Limited (Cause 331 of 2014) [2022] KEELRC 1516 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in the judgment (Employment and Labour Relations Court cause, Nakuru). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/1516/eng@2022-06-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.