Andjorin v Boeing International Corporation (Cause E994 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 1130 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court refused to review its earlier ruling sending an unfair termination dispute to arbitration, confirming that disagreement with a decision is a ground for appeal, not review.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the ruling of 23rd June 2022 contained a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record under rule 33(1)(b) of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules, 2016
No. The applicant was merely questioning the merits of the court's findings on duress and the validity of the MTSA, which raises matters where two opinions are possible and require detailed reasoning, not an evident error.
The court applied Nyamongo & Nyamongo v Kogo and National Bank of Kenya Ltd v Ndungu Njau: an error on the face of the record must stare one in the face and admit no two opinions. The applicant's grievances went to the correctness of the court's analysis of the evidence and law - grounds for appeal, not review. The paragraph on waiver clauses merely noted such clauses are typical and made no finding on the MTSA's specific waiver clause or its enforceability.
Whether the impugned paragraph 72 of the ruling conclusively determined the entire suit at the interlocutory stage
No. The paragraph merely confirmed that waiver clauses are typical in settlement agreements and made no reference to the specific waiver clause in the MTSA or its effect.
The court found the impugned paragraph made no determination on the MTSA's waiver clause or its import. Questions of the effect of discharge vouchers or settlement agreements had not been decided. Further, the applicant was not without remedy: arbitral awards are challengeable in court, and he had a statutorily guaranteed right of appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Legal principles established
#- An error apparent on the face of the record must be self-evident and require no elaborate argument; a mere erroneous decision or a point on which two opinions are possible is not a ground for review but for appeal
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 13th October 2022 is dismissed with no orders as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011; Rule 33 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016; sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 80 of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 45 Rules 1, 2, 3 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Article 159 of the Constitution
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Andjorin v Boeing International Corporation (Cause E994 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 1130 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). ELRC Cause E994 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/1130/eng@2023-05-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.