[2023] KEELRC 369 (KLR)
The court found that the 3rd respondent failed to provide any understandable, excusable, or reasonable explanation for non-attendance on February 9, 2022, when its earlier application was dismissed. Furthermore, there was no explanation for the inordinate delay of over seven months before filing the present...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELRC 369 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Leonard Sigai Arap Bett; Respondent: Governor Bomet County; Respondent: County Government of Bomet; Respondent: Bomet County Public Service Board
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kericho
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Employment and Labour Relations Petition E001 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Employment and Labour Relations Petition / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal Order
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- DN Nderitu
- Legal Topics
- Reinstatement of Application, Dismissal for Non Attendance, Inordinate Delay, Procedural Fairness
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Leonard Sigai Arap Bett
Applicant
Governor Bomet County
Respondent
County Government of Bomet
Respondent
Bomet County Public Service Board
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment and Labour Relations Petition / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 3rd respondent has provided sufficient and reasonable explanation for non-attendance leading to dismissal of its application.
- 2 Whether the delay of over seven months in filing the application to set aside the dismissal is excusable.
- 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to set aside the dismissal order.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the 3rd respondent failed to provide any understandable, excusable, or reasonable explanation for non-attendance on February 9, 2022, when its earlier application was dismissed. Furthermore, there was no explanation for the inordinate delay of over seven months before filing the present application. The court emphasized that the judgment in the main matter was already delivered and was declaratory in nature, with no appeal having been preferred. In the absence of a satisfactory explanation for both the non-attendance and the delay, the court declined to exercise its discretion to set aside the dismissal order. The application was therefore dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application by the 3rd respondent dated September 8, 2022 is dismissed.
- There shall be no orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
Bett v Governor Bomet County & 2 others (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E001 of 2020) [2023] KEELRC 369 (KLR) (16 February 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELRC 369 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kericho
Employment and Labour Relations Petition E001 of 2020
DN Nderitu, J
February 16, 2023
In The Matter Of Constitution Of Kenya And In The Matter Of Articles 2, 3, 10, 27, 73, 159, 165, 226, 232,235, 236, 258 And 259 Of The Constitution Of Kenya And In The Matter Of The Alleged Contravention Of Articles 10, 226, 232, 235, And 236 Of The Constitution Of Kenya And In The Matter Of County Goverments’ Act No 17 Of 2012 And In The Matter Of Public Service (Values And Principles) Act No 1A Of 2015 And In The Matter Of Salaries And Remuneration Commission Act No 10 Of 2011 And In The Matter Of Public Finance Management Act No 18 Of 2012
Between
Leonard Sigai Arap Bett
Petitioner
and
Governor Bomet County
1st Respondent
County Government of Bomet
2nd Respondent
Bomet County Public Service Board
3rd Respondent
Ruling
1. In a notice of motion dated September 8, 2022 (the application) the 3rd respondent (the applicant) is seeking to set aside orders made by the court (O Makau J) on February 9, 2022 dismissing the applicant’s notice of motion dated November 22, 2021 for non-attendance.
2. The application is expressed to be brought under rule 22 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rulesand is founded on the grounds contained on the face of the application.
3. The application is supported by the affidavit of Chepng’eno Milkah, Advocate, who is in the conduct of this matter for the 3rd respondent explaining the circumstances under which the said application was dismissed for non-attendance.
4. Counsel has filed written submissions in support of the application dated October 5, 2022.
5. There is an affidavit of service of the said application upon the other parties but no response(s) has been filed.
6. This court has gone through the said application, the supporting affidavit, and the written submission bycounsel. The reasons given purportedly explaining the circumstances, under which the notice of motion dated November 22, 2021was dismissed on February 9, 2022 are not understandable, excusable, and or reasonable.
7. There is no explanation whatsoever as to why no action was taken between February 9, 2022, when the noticeof motion dated November 22, 2021 was dismissed, and September 14, 2022 when the instant application was filed,. A period of about seven (7) months.
8. The judgment in this matter was delivered way back on November 18, 2021and no appeal was preferred against the same.
9. The said judgment gave orders that are merely declaratory and there is nothing to be executed.
10. There is no good explanation as to why there was no court attendance on the part of the 3rd respondent or counsel on February 9, 2022 and no explanation has been proffered for the delay of over seven (7) months in filing of the instant application. The delay in filing the instant application is clearly inordinate.
11. For the foregoing reasons the application by the 3rd respondent dated September 8, 2022 is hereby dismissed with no orders as to costs.
DATED, DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, AND SIGNED AT NAKURU THIS 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023. DAVID NDERITUJUDGE