[2016] KEHC 5373 (KLR)
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes that substantially relate to employment and labour relations, as such jurisdiction is exclusively vested in the Employment and Labour Relations Court by Article 162(2)(a) of the Constitution and Section 12(1) of the Employment and Labour Relations Act....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 5373 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Abungaana Khahuu Khasiani; Defendant: Barclays Bank of Kenya Ltd; Defendant: Reli Co-operative Savings and Credit Society Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 949 of 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Jurisdiction
- Outcome
- Transferred for want of jurisdiction.
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Wrongful Dismissal, Breach of Employment Contract, Jurisdiction, Defamation in Employment, Malicious Misrepresentation
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Abungaana Khahuu Khasiani
Plaintiff
Barclays Bank of Kenya Ltd
Defendant
Reli Co-operative Savings and Credit Society Ltd
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Jurisdiction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine a dispute substantially relating to employment and labour relations.
- 2 Whether the suit should be transferred to the Employment and Labour Relations Court in light of constitutional and statutory provisions.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes that substantially relate to employment and labour relations, as such jurisdiction is exclusively vested in the Employment and Labour Relations Court by Article 162(2)(a) of the Constitution and Section 12(1) of the Employment and Labour Relations Act. Although the suit was instituted before the effective date of the 2010 Constitution, it is not part-heard, and thus the transitional provisions do not apply to allow the High Court to continue hearing it. Consequently, the court must decline jurisdiction and direct that the file be placed before the Employment and Labour Relations Court for directions and further consideration.
Court Disposition
Transferred for want of jurisdiction.
Orders
- The file is to be placed before the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi for directions and further consideration as to its disposal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CIVIL CASE NO. 949 OF 2003
ABUNGAANA KHAHUU KHASIANI ……………………….....................…....PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
BARCLAYS BANK OF KENYA LTD……………...................………....1ST DEFENDANT
RELI CO-OPERATIVE SAVINGS AND CREDIT SOCIETY LTD…....2ND DEFENDANT
RULING
This is a fairly old suit instituted on 11th September 2003. It is now 12. 5 years since its institution in this court and it remains unheard for one reason or another. Nonetheless, it now appears that the plaintiff is ready to have the matter heard and determined by complying with the provisions of Order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules on pre-trial requirements. However, my perusal of plaint dated 11th September 2003 shows that the plaintiff’s claim against the defendants is for general damages for defamation and or malicious and negligent misrepresentation as well as general damages for breach of contract and benefits of the reminder of the employment contract period. The subject contract is a contract of employment which the plaintiff alleges was breached when he was wrongfully and unlawfully dismissed from his employment.
The above being the case, then it is my humble view that this court is devoid of jurisdiction to hear and determine the dispute which substantially relates to Employment and Labour Relations. Such disputes can only be heard and determined by Employment and Labour Relations Court established under Section 4 of the Employment and Labour Relations Act, as contemplated in Article 162(2) (a) of the Constitution.
Furthermore, Article 165(5) (b) of the Constitution expressly ousts the jurisdiction of this court from hearing and determining disputes reserved for courts contemplated in Article 162(2) of the Constitution.
Albeit this suit was instituted before the effective date of the Constitution on 27th August 2010 and therefore the transitional and consequential provisions of part 5 Section 22 of the Constitution on administration of justice would be applicable, nonetheless, this matter is not part heard and therefore this court would not ‘continue’ to hear it.
In the premises, and for want of jurisdiction and as Section 12(1) of the Employment and Labour Relations Act clearly vests the jurisdiction both original and appellate jurisdiction in the Employment and Labour Relations Court to hear and determine such disputes as contemplated in Article 162(2) (a) of the Constitution, I have no option at this stage but to down my tools as commanded by Article 165(5)(b) of the Constitution and direct that this file be and is hereby placed before the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi for directions and further consideration as to its disposal.
Orders accordingly.
R.E. ABURILI
JUDGE
19. 4.2016