[2021] KEELC 566 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 566 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants' application was improperly before the court because there were already two pending suits (ELRC 13 of 2017 and ELRC 12 of 2018) addressing the same subject matter. The proper procedure would have been to file the application for interlocutory relief within those existing suits...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELC 566 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Alexander Onyango & 22 Others; Respondent: Nakuru County Government; Respondent: Nakuru County Public Service Board; Respondent: CECM Public Service Training and Devolution
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
30 November 2021
Case Number
Environment & Land Case E005 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
HS Wasilwa
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Locus Standi, Pending Suit Duplication, Employment Termination Disputes
Source Language
english
Employment and Labour Civil Procedure Interlocutory Injunctions Locus Standi Pending Suit Duplication Employment Termination Disputes

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Onyango & 22 Others

Applicant

Nakuru County Government

Respondent

Nakuru County Public Service Board

Respondent

CECM Public Service Training and Devolution

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for restraining orders is properly before the court given the existence of pending suits on the same subject matter.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have locus standi to bring the application.
  3. 3 Whether the recruitment process should be restrained pending determination of the main employment claims.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants' application was improperly before the court because there were already two pending suits (ELRC 13 of 2017 and ELRC 12 of 2018) addressing the same subject matter. The proper procedure would have been to file the application for interlocutory relief within those existing suits rather than as a separate miscellaneous application. The court further noted that the application lacked a substantive claim upon which it could be anchored, rendering it procedurally defective. As such, the application amounted to a duplication of judicial effort and was dismissed for want of merit.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The miscellaneous application is dismissed.
  • No restraining orders are granted.