Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedELRC Appeal No. E244 of 2025· [2026] KEELRC 2437 (KLR)

Ismax Security Ltd v Bonyi (Appeal E244 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2437 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
31 August 2026
1,113 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court struck out a second lawsuit over the same employment dispute, ruling duplicate suits waste courts' time and risk conflicting decisions.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an appeal from the ruling of 24 July 2025 in Milimani MCELRC E1090 of 2024 (Irene Kerubo v Imax Security Ltd). The appellant, Imax Security Ltd, had applied on 26 March 2025 to strike out the respondent's memorandum of claim dated 15 April 2024 on the ground that it was sub judice, the respondent having been named as a claimant in an earlier suit, Milimani MCELRC No. E1957 of 2023 (Tom Nyamosi & 54 others v Imax Security Limited), arising from the same employment relationship. The magistrate found that the respondent had not given instructions for the filing of the earlier suit and struck her out of that earlier suit, but declined to strike out her own claim. On appeal, the appellant contended the magistrate erred in law and fact by exercising discretion on unknown legal principles, citing the Supreme Court's articulation of the sub judice doctrine in Kenya National Commission for Human Rights v Attorney General and the High Court's guidance in Republic v Kariuki that a replica suit should be struck out under section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act. The court held that the facts of the earlier filing were not denied, that the lack of authority for the respondent's joinder in the first suit did not justify filing a parallel claim before the same court, and that her remedy lay in extricating herself from the initial suit. The court found the claim to be an unnecessary multiplicity filed contrary to the sub judice rule, allowed the appeal, dismissed Nairobi MCELRC No. E1090 of 2024, and awarded costs of the appeal to the appellant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Sub judice - whether the respondent's later suit offended section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act

Holding

Yes. The earlier suit, Nairobi MCELRC No. E1957 of 2023, was filed before the respondent's suit, the parties and grievances arise from the same employment relationship, and the claims raise substantially similar issues; the later suit is unnecessary multiplicity.

Reasoning

The court adopted the Supreme Court's formulation of the sub judice doctrine in the KNCHR case and the High Court's guidance in Republic v Kariuki that a replica suit should be struck out. The respondent's claim that she gave no authority for the earlier suit did not assist her: her remedy was to be drawn into and extricate herself from the initial suit, not to institute a parallel claim before the same court, which risks conflicting orders and embarrasses the courts.

p. 4
02

Whether the learned magistrate erred in failing to strike out the suit

Holding

Yes. The application dated 26 March 2025 had a good foundation, and the magistrate's failure to strike out the suit warranted appellate interference.

Reasoning

The appeal was premised on the magistrate exercising judicial discretion on unknown legal principles. On the undisputed facts - the earlier suit existed, the respondent was listed as a party in it, and the subject matter was the same - the only question was the alleged lack of authority for the first suit, which did not cure the sub judice defect. The appeal was therefore allowed and the suit dismissed.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a person is joined in a pending suit without authority, the remedy is to seek to extricate herself from that suit, not to file a fresh suit over the same subject matter
  • Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act requires the court to strike out a suit filed as a replica of others already in court; while an issue is pending between the same parties, another court is barred from trying it and may order a stay of proceedings

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal is allowed
  2. 2.Nairobi MCELRC No. E1090 of 2024 is hereby dismissed
  3. 3.Costs of the appeal to the appellant
On appeal from
Milimani MCELRC
MCELRC E1090 of 2024
Jurisdiction invoked
First appellate jurisdiction over a ruling of the magistrate's court in Milimani MCELRC E1090 of 2024

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ismax Security Ltd v Bonyi (Appeal E244 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2437 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELRC Appeal No. E244 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2437/eng@2026-08-31

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