Okello v Glosec Services Limited (Cause 219 of 2015) [2022] KEELRC 1517 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employer who ignored an employment case for six years lost its bid to overturn a Kshs.577,397 judgment against it.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the default judgment and decree of October 7, 2021 should be set aside under Order 10 rule 11
The application fails: the respondent was properly served, was aware of the cause throughout, deliberately failed to defend it, and disclosed no prima facie defence.
The court found service duly effected (affidavit of service of August 3, 2015, plus later court orders confirming service and notices). The respondent's director visited the claimant's counsel in 2019 and attended court on several dates, proving knowledge. No consent recording settlement was filed; the unilateral deposit of Kshs.26,908 was not a settlement. No draft defence was attached, so the court could not assess any triable issues. Delay of nearly seven years would prejudice the claimant, and litigation must come to an end.
Treatment of the Kshs.26,908 unilaterally deposited into the claimant's account
Although deposited without the claimant's consent, the amount shall be taken into account in computing the sum due and payable under the decree.
Both parties agreed the deposit was made but the claimant denied consenting to it. The court declined to treat it as a settlement but, balancing the parties' positions, directed that it be offset in determining the actual amount payable to the claimant under the judgment.
Legal principles established
#- The court's discretion under Order 10 rule 11 to set aside a default judgment, though wide, is guided by settled principles including reason for default, delay, triable issues, prejudice and the interest of justice.
- A party who was duly served and aware of a cause but deliberately declined to defend it cannot obtain setting aside of the ensuing default judgment; equity does not aid the indolent.
- An applicant for setting aside must demonstrate a prima facie defence, ordinarily by attaching a draft defence; failure to do so is fatal.
- A unilateral deposit of money into a claimant's account without consent does not constitute a settlement of a pending cause.
Court orders
#- 1.The respondent's application to set aside the judgment, decree and proceedings is dismissed
- 2.The sum of Kshs.26,908 deposited by the respondent into the claimant's bank account be taken into account in determining the actual amount due and payable to the claimant
- 3.Costs of the application awarded to the claimant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 10 rule 11 and Order 51 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Article 159(2) of the Constitution; Section 3(1) of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Okello v Glosec Services Limited (Cause 219 of 2015) [2022] KEELRC 1517 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/1517/eng@2022-06-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.