Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in the judgment (application for review of judgment delivered January 24, 2020)· [2023] KEELRC 1319 (KLR)

Kenya Engineering Workers Union v Drilling Spares and Services Limited (Cause 1265 of 2018) [2023] KEELRC 1319 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
9 May 2023
1,287 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court dismissed a union's attempt to overturn a 2020 judgment through review, ruling it was really a disguised appeal filed too late.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant/Applicant, Wyclifie Amakombo Nyamwata, applied for review of the judgment of Radido J delivered on January 24, 2020, asserting that the court's constitution covered the sector in which the Respondent, Associated Assemblers Limited, operates. The application was supported by his affidavit; the Respondent opposed it through a replying affidavit of Mr Kamal Pal Bhalla, deposing that the application was a sham, an appeal disguised as a review, and had been filed after unreasonable delay. The application was disposed of by written submissions. The Applicant relied on section 16 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2016 and Rule 33 of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules, 2016, and on Rika J's decision in Amalgamated Union of Kenya Metal Workers v Dock Workers Union, urging that a certificate of registration the Respondent had failed to produce justified review and that the memorandum of claim dated July 30, 2018 should also be allowed. The Respondent relied on Anthony Chelimo v Kenya Commercial Bank, Shreeji Enterprises Limited v John Muigai Chai and the Chelimo Plot Owners case, submitting that failure to consider evidence is a ground of appeal, not review, and that the 15-month delay was unexplained. The court (Nzioki wa Makau J) held that the application attacked the decision for failure to consider two exhibits, which can never be a ground of review, and that the delay of over one year and three months was unexplained and unreasonable. Dismissing the application as a sham and a waste of judicial resources, the court ordered dismissal with costs to the Respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether failure to consider exhibits constitutes a ground for review

Holding

No; it is a ground of appeal, not review

Reasoning

The court held that an application asserting the judge failed to take into account two exhibits at trial invites a reappraisal of evidence, which is the province of an appeal. Review is confined to discovery of new matter, error apparent on the face of the record, clarification, or other sufficient reason; a complaint about the assessment of evidence does not fall within these parameters and is properly pursued on appeal.

p. 3
02

Whether the delay of over 1 year 3 months in filing the review was excusable

Holding

No; the delay was unexplained and therefore unreasonable

Reasoning

The review application was filed on April 21, 2021 against a judgment delivered on January 24, 2020, a delay of over one year and three months. No explanation was offered for the delay. Following the principle that unexplained delay may be construed as unreasonable, the applicant failed to satisfy the condition that the application be made without undue delay.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Failure by a court to consider evidence or exhibits tendered at trial is a ground of appeal, not a ground for review
  • An unexplained delay in bringing an application for review renders the delay unreasonable and is fatal to the application

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application for review is dismissed with costs to the Respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Actsection 16
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) RulesRule 33
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 45

Cases cited (4)

  • Amalgamated Union of Kenya Metal Workers v Dock Workers Union & Associated Assemblers Limited
    [2019] eKLR
  • Anthony Chelimo v Kenya Commercial Bank Limited
    [2020] eKLR
  • Shreeji Enterprises Limited v John Muigai Chai
    [2020] eKLR
  • Executive Committee Chelimo Plot Owners Welfare Group & 288 others v Langat Joel & 4 others (sued as the Management Committee of Chelimo Squatters Group)
    [2018] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 16 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2016 and Rule 33 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Engineering Workers Union v Drilling Spares and Services Limited (Cause 1265 of 2018) [2023] KEELRC 1319 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in the judgment (application for review of judgment delivered January 24, 2020). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/1319/eng@2023-05-09

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