[2021] KEELRC 950 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 950 (KLR)

The court found that the delay in prosecuting the appeal was largely attributable to the Respondent and his agents, who engaged in actions before the High Court rather than submitting to the Employment and Labour Relations Court for determination. As such, the application for dismissal for want of prosecution was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 950 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Agricultural Society of Kenya; Respondent: Benjamin K. Kwambai; Respondent: Faith Muthee t/a Compliance Auctioneers
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Appeal 34 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Dismissal of Appeal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Delay in Prosecution, Stay Orders, Pretrial Directions
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Delay in Prosecution Stay Orders Pretrial Directions

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Agricultural Society of Kenya

Appellant

Benjamin K. Kwambai

Respondent

Faith Muthee t/a Compliance Auctioneers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Dismissal of Appeal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to delay by the Appellant.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in prosecuting the appeal is attributable to the Appellant or the Respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay in prosecuting the appeal was largely attributable to the Respondent and his agents, who engaged in actions before the High Court rather than submitting to the Employment and Labour Relations Court for determination. As such, the application for dismissal for want of prosecution was self-defeating and not merited. The court dismissed the motion with costs to the Appellant and directed that the matter be set down for pretrial directions before another judge, as the presiding judge recused himself due to having formed an opinion on the matter.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution is dismissed with costs to the Appellant.
  • The matter is to be set down for pretrial directions before another judge on 28th September 2021.