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 OutNot stated in the judgment excerpt· [2023] KEELRC 503 (KLR)

Okoiti v Board, Export Processing Zones Authority & 3 others; Otieno (Interested Party) (Petition 133 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 503 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
28 February 2023
JRJames Rika
334 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court struck out a last-minute attempt to postpone a ruling, confirming parties cannot shop for new judges after losing.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Employment and Labour Relations Court, per James Rika J, delivered a short ruling on February 28, 2023, dealing with an attempt by the 1st Respondent to arrest the delivery of a scheduled Ruling. The 1st Respondent had earlier filed an application for review of a judgment, and its initial application to defer the Ruling, made on February 24, 2023, had been declined by the trial court as an abuse of process. On February 27, 2023, the day before the scheduled delivery, the 1st Respondent renewed the application before the Hon. Justice Monica Mbaru, a Judge of coordinate jurisdiction, who granted interim orders directing that the Ruling not be delivered. Rika J held that it is contrary to the principle of fair administration of justice for a Judge of coordinate jurisdiction to stay delivery of a ruling by another Judge, and equally improper for a party to renew, before another court, an application already declined by the trial court. The court struck out the application placed before Justice Mbaru, set aside all consequential orders keeping the Ruling in abeyance, directed that the Ruling be released to the parties and placed on the record, and referred the file to the Principal Judge for investigation into the circumstances surrounding the grant of the orders of February 27, 2023. No costs order was made in the excerpt.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the interim orders issued by a coordinate Judge could stand

Holding

The orders were set aside and the application struck out as an abuse of process and contrary to fair administration of justice

Reasoning

The trial court had already declined a similar application by the same party, which had also been found abusive. Renewing the application a day before the scheduled ruling, before a Judge of coordinate jurisdiction, circumvented the trial court and was contrary to fair administration of justice. The court struck out the application and set aside all consequential orders, releasing the ruling and referring the matter for investigation.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A Judge of coordinate jurisdiction ought not to issue orders staying delivery of a ruling by another Judge
  • A party may not renew before another court an application already dealt with and declined by the trial court

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Application placed before the Hon. Justice Monica Mbaru, filed by the 1st Respondent, is struck out
  2. 2.All consequential orders issued the previous day, keeping delivery of the Ruling in abeyance, are set aside
  3. 3.The Ruling shall be released to the Parties and placed on the record
  4. 4.The file to be placed before the Principal Judge for investigations surrounding the grant of orders made on February 27, 2023
Jurisdiction invoked
Not expressly invoked in the judgment excerpt

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Okoiti v Board, Export Processing Zones Authority & 3 others; Otieno (Interested Party) (Petition 133 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 503 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in the judgment excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/503/eng@2023-02-28

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