Njeri (Suing on Behalf of the Estate of Everlyne Nyambura Ndungu) v University of Nairobi (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E033 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2337 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment and Labour Relations Court let a late appeal proceed because it raised an arguable issue, despite a weak explanation for the 23-day delay.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the 23-day delay in filing the appeal was satisfactorily explained
The delay was not inordinate, but the explanation (awaiting the decree) was not a valid reason since the decree was unnecessary to file a memorandum of appeal
The court applied the Salat principles. It found the 23-day delay not inordinate, noting the court vacation period under Order 50 rule 4. However, it accepted the respondent's argument that a memorandum of appeal requires only the judgment, not the decree, so the applicant's explanation did not amount to good and sufficient cause. Extension was nonetheless granted because the discretion should not be used to prevent an appeal.
Whether the intended appeal is arguable
The intended appeal is arguable on the ground that the trial magistrate adopted an alien mode of computing gratuity
The court examined the draft memorandum of appeal and found at least one ground — the alleged erroneous gratuity computation — raised an arguable point, despite the respondent's reliance on ELRC precedent that the 2013-2017 CBA cannot apply retrospectively before 1st July 2013.
Legal principles established
#- Extension of time is a discretionary equitable remedy requiring explanation of the delay, absence of prejudice, and an arguable appeal
- An applicant for extension of time must show good and sufficient cause and that the justice of the case favours extension, including an arguable appeal
- The discretion on extension of time should be exercised so as not to prevent an appeal
Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted to the applicant to appeal out of time within 60 days
- 2.The memorandum of appeal deemed as duly filed
- 3.Costs of the application to the respondent
- 4.Mention on 17th September 2025 to confirm the status of the appeal and issue further directions
- On appeal from
- Chief Magistrate's Court (CMELRC No. E886 of 2023, Jacqueline Njeri v University of Nairobi)
- CMELRC No. E886 of 2023
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 18 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules 2024; Sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 79G of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 50 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Manguthl Simon Isingoma, Saverio Calocero Spinicah & Matara Moraa v Sobetra Uganda Kenya Limited & ICM SPA Limited[2026] KEELRC 2609 (KLR)24 Sept 2026
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Njeri (Suing on Behalf of the Estate of Everlyne Nyambura Ndungu) v University of Nairobi (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E033 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2337 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELRC No. E034 of 2025 (Notice of Motion dated 5th February 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2337/eng@2025-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.