[2017] KEELRC 1709 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 1709 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant's application to vary the consent judgment was incompetent because it failed to specify the correct amount that should replace the sum in the consent, nor did it adequately disclose the nature of the error or the remedy sought. The court was satisfied with the respondent's...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 1709 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Belinda Wanjiri Waitiki; Respondent: Kenya Airports Authority
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1278 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Cause / Ruling on Application to Vary Consent Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Consent Judgment, Review of Judgment, Mathematical Error, Salary in Lieu of Notice
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Consent Judgment Review of Judgment Mathematical Error Salary in Lieu of Notice

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 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Belinda Wanjiri Waitiki

Claimant

Kenya Airports Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Cause / Ruling on Application to Vary Consent Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the consent judgment entered on 12th May 2016 should be varied due to an alleged mathematical error.
  2. 2 Whether the application to vary the consent judgment is competent in the absence of a specified correct amount.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's application to vary the consent judgment was incompetent because it failed to specify the correct amount that should replace the sum in the consent, nor did it adequately disclose the nature of the error or the remedy sought. The court was satisfied with the respondent's explanation regarding the calculation of the decretal sum and found no justification to vary the consent order reached by the parties. As such, the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application to vary the consent judgment is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.