Nganga v Sinopec International Petroleum Services Corporation Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal 57 of 2017) [2024] KEELRC 834 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court reopened a worker's injury appeal after the Supreme Court clarified jurisdiction, confirming older rulings can be reviewed in changed circumstances.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the ELRC judgment of 23rd January 2020 declining jurisdiction could be reviewed under Rule 33(1)(d)
Yes. The Chief Justice's Gazette Notice No. 5476 of 28th April 2023 and the Supreme Court decision in Law Society of Kenya v Attorney General & COTU constituted sufficient reason for review.
The original judgment declined jurisdiction and set aside the trial court's decree, following the law prevailing before the Supreme Court clarified ELRC jurisdiction over pre-WIBA work-injury claims. The Chief Justice's subsequent practice directions directed that such claims proceed to conclusion in the courts where filed. Reviewing the judgment was necessary to avoid locking the litigant out of court entirely.
Whether the Respondent's functus officio objection defeats the review application
The objection failed; the court found sufficient reason to review its own judgment notwithstanding that it had earlier determined the appeal.
The Respondent argued the court was functus officio and that the judgment was proper under the law prevailing at the time. The court held the judgment was an honest error made before the practice directions clarified the position, and that the ends of justice and the litigant's constitutional right to a determination required review rather than reliance on functus officio.
Legal principles established
#- Parties who filed work-injury claims during the period of jurisdictional uncertainty had a legitimate expectation that their cases would be concluded before the courts where they were filed, per the Supreme Court decision and the Chief Justice's 2023 directions.
- A court may review its own judgment where an honest error, later clarified by subsequent directions, would otherwise lock an innocent litigant out of access to justice.
Court orders
#- 1.The judgment and decree of this Court dated 23rd January 2020 (Justice Mbaru) is reviewed so that the appeal is allowed to proceed
- 2.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal
- On appeal from
- Chief Magistrate's Court, Naivasha
- CMCC No. 222 of 2014
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 50 of the Constitution; Section 16 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act; 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, "Nganga v Sinopec International Petroleum Services Corporation Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal 57 of 2017) [2024] KEELRC 834 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Notice of Motion dated 25th January, 2024 (Arising from Naivasha CMCC Case Number 222 of 2014). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/834/eng@2024-04-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.