Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedNotice of motion dated November 15, 2022 (cause filed February 27, 2017)· [2023] KEELRC 2332 (KLR)

Obwogon v Marula Estate (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 82 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 2332 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
25 October 2023
2,043 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment and Labour Relations Court reinstated a dismissed employment case because the claimant was never properly served with the dismissal notice.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant filed a memorandum of claim in 2017, but the cause lay dormant after an adjournment in October 2019. The Deputy Registrar issued a notice to show cause why the cause should not be dismissed for want of prosecution, and on October 14, 2021 the court dismissed the cause with no orders as to costs. The claimant then filed a notice of motion dated November 15, 2022 (filed December 15, 2022) under Order 17 rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules and sections 1A and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act seeking review/setting aside of the dismissal and reinstatement of the cause. The respondent opposed, arguing indolence and laches, that courts operated virtually during the pandemic, that the file was traceable in early 2022, and that the application was an abuse of process filed one year and three months after dismissal. The court framed a single issue: whether the cause should be reinstated. Applying Ivita v Kyumbu, Shah v Mbogo and related authorities, it held the discretion must be exercised judiciously. It found no affidavit of service authenticating service of the NTSC on the claimant or his counsel; only the respondent's counsel was served, and the NTSC bore the wrong claimant name. Holding neither party nor the court blameless, the court allowed the application, set aside the dismissal of October 14, 2021, reinstated the cause for priority hearing, and made no order as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the cause dismissed for want of prosecution should be reinstated

Holding

The application was allowed: the dismissal order of October 14, 2021 was set aside because the claimant and his counsel were not proved to have been served with the NTSC, and neither party nor the court was free of blame for the delay.

Reasoning

The court noted the cause lay dormant over a year, including during the Covid period when virtual hearings operated under gazette notice No 3137 of March 20, 2020. However, the NTSC issued by the Deputy Registrar had no affidavit of service authenticating service on the claimant or his counsel; the emailing sheet showed only the respondent's counsel was served, and the claimant's name was wrong on the NTSC. Both parties and the court contributed to the delay, so justice favoured reinstatement with a priority hearing.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • The court's discretion to reinstate a dismissed cause must be exercised judiciously, considering whether the claimant has lost interest and whether the delay is inordinate, unreasonable, inexcusable and prejudicial.
  • A dismissal for want of prosecution following service of a notice to show cause not proved by affidavit of service is untenable.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The orders made on October 14, 2021 dismissing the cause are set aside and the cause is reinstated
  2. 2.The cause to be fixed for hearing on priority basis
  3. 3.No order as to costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 17 rule 2(1) and (2)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 12 rule 7
  • Civil Procedure Actsections 1A, 1B and 3A
  • Employment and Labour Relations Actsection 3
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159(2)(b)
  • Rules of the Employment and Labour Relations Courtrule 16

Cases cited (4)

  • Ivita v Kyumbu
    [1984] KLR
  • Jim Rodgers Gitonga Njeru v Al-Husnain Motors Limited and 2 others
    [2018] eKLR
  • Bilha Ngonyo Issac v Kembu Farm & another
    [2018] eKLR
  • Shah v Mbogo and another
    [1967] EA 116
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 17 rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, sections 1A and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, and rule 16 of the rules of the Employment and Labour Relations Court

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Obwogon v Marula Estate (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 82 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 2332 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Notice of motion dated November 15, 2022 (cause filed February 27, 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/2332/eng@2023-10-05

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