Owiti & 173 others v Caddell Construction Company (De) LLC (Miscellaneous Application E076 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1918 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court dismissed an employer's bid to halt a 174-employee class action, confirming that delaying a defence for nearly two years will not be excused.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether refusal of adjournment violated the right to a fair hearing under Article 50(2)(c) and (k)
No violation; the Applicant had nearly two years to file its defence, was granted an extension on 24th July 2023 and still failed to comply, so the trial court was justified in proceeding under Rule 15(3).
The Applicant invoked Article 50(2)(c) and (k) and the Muruatetu authority on the non-derogable right to fair trial. The court held the right, while sacrosanct, is not absolute and must be balanced against expeditious disposal. The reasons of bereavement and logistical challenges could not justify prolonged inaction, and a corporate entity cannot excuse non-compliance on the absence of a single employee.
Whether stay of proceedings could be founded on Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules
No; the ELRC is a specialized court governed by its own rules and Rule 32(2) permits application of civil procedure rules only in execution of court matters, so reliance on Order 42 Rule 6 was misplaced.
The court held that as a specialized court its procedures are governed by its own rules. Rule 32(2) of the 2016 Rules permits the application of civil procedure rules only in execution of matters. Even on merits, substantial loss was not demonstrated; the size of the claim alone does not warrant a stay.
Whether the application complied with the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016
The application was procedurally defective; the Applicant failed to exhaust the proper appellate mechanism under Rule 8 and the supervisory jurisdiction was not properly invoked.
The Respondents argued incompetence for failure to follow the 2016 Rules, which require appeals by memorandum of appeal accompanied by proceedings and evidence. The Applicant filed no appeal but sought supervisory orders under Article 165(6). The court held supervisory jurisdiction must be invoked judiciously and failure to exhaust the appellate mechanism rendered the application defective.
Legal principles established
#- The right to a fair hearing is sacrosanct but not absolute and must be balanced against the need for expeditious disposal of cases.
- The Civil Procedure Act and Rules apply in the ELRC only where expressly sanctioned by the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules.
- A corporate entity cannot excuse non-compliance based on the absence of a single employee.
- Supervisory jurisdiction under Article 165(6) must be invoked judiciously and does not displace the proper appellate mechanism.
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 29th February 2024 is dismissed.
- 2.Costs awarded to the Claimants/Respondents.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate courts under Article 165(6) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Owiti & 173 others v Caddell Construction Company (De) LLC (Miscellaneous Application E076 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1918 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). CMELRC Cause No. 1102 of 2022 (Notice of Motion dated 29th February 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1918/eng@2025-06-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.