[2018] KEELRC 411 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 411 (KLR)

The court found that the factual issues raised in the Claimant's application—specifically, the amounts owed and the relationships between the parties—cannot be determined without a full hearing of the main suit on its merits. Granting the orders sought at the interlocutory stage would amount to determining...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 411 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Augustine Bala Osogo & 157 Others; Respondent: Magrose Security Services Limited; Respondent: County Government of Homa Bay
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 167 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
MN Nduma
Legal Topics
Wage Claims, Interlocutory Applications, Third Party Liability
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Wage Claims Interlocutory Applications Third Party Liability

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Augustine Bala Osogo & 157 Others

Applicant

Magrose Security Services Limited

Respondent

County Government of Homa Bay

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the 2nd Respondent should be compelled to disclose and deposit in court the amount owed to the 1st Respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the court should deduct the sum owed to the Claimant from the amount deposited by the 2nd Respondent before hearing the main suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the factual issues raised in the Claimant's application—specifically, the amounts owed and the relationships between the parties—cannot be determined without a full hearing of the main suit on its merits. Granting the orders sought at the interlocutory stage would amount to determining substantive rights without due process. Therefore, the application was dismissed as non-suited, and the Respondents were directed to file their statements of defence to enable the matter to proceed in the normal course.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Respondents to file statements of defence within 21 days.