[2017] KEELRC 1542 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 1542 (KLR)

The court found that the Claimant had failed to take any steps to prosecute the Cause for approximately four years, including failing to pay court-ordered adjournment fees and failing to attend the scheduled hearing. The Respondent also failed to attend. The court held that such inaction amounted to want of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 1542 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Benard Ekamuran Oriama; Respondent: Alibe Security Co. Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 532 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Cause dismissed for want of prosecution, no order as to costs.
Judges
MSA Makhandia
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Adjournment Fees, Failure to Prosecute, Court Attendance
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Adjournment Fees Failure to Prosecute Court Attendance

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benard Ekamuran Oriama

Claimant

Alibe Security Co. Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the Cause should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to inaction by the Claimant.
  2. 2 Whether failure to pay adjournment fees and absence of parties warrants dismissal of the Cause.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Claimant had failed to take any steps to prosecute the Cause for approximately four years, including failing to pay court-ordered adjournment fees and failing to attend the scheduled hearing. The Respondent also failed to attend. The court held that such inaction amounted to want of prosecution and justified dismissal of the Cause. The court exercised its discretion to dismiss the Cause for want of prosecution, noting that the Claimant had not demonstrated any interest in pursuing the matter and that the Respondent had not participated either. No order as to costs was made.

Court Disposition

Cause dismissed for want of prosecution, no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The Cause is dismissed for want of prosecution.
  • There is no order as to costs.