[2021] KEELRC 1876 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 1876 (KLR)

The Court found that the Respondent failed to provide sufficient evidence that the Claimant was a party to the other suits filed by the Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union, as the Respondent did not file the appendix listing the Union members in Kericho Cause No. 72 of 2018 despite court orders....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 1876 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Dorcas Wairimu; Respondent: Eastern Produce Kenya Ltd
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 206 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Motion / Ruling on Application to Transfer Suit and for Costs
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the claimant
Legal Topics
Transfer of Suit, Union Representation, Employment Termination, Costs of Application
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Transfer of Suit Union Representation Employment Termination Costs of Application

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dorcas Wairimu

Claimant

Eastern Produce Kenya Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Motion / Ruling on Application to Transfer Suit and for Costs

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be transferred to the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kericho for hearing and determination.
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant was a party to other suits filed by the Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union regarding the same termination.
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant should bear the costs of the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the Respondent failed to provide sufficient evidence that the Claimant was a party to the other suits filed by the Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union, as the Respondent did not file the appendix listing the Union members in Kericho Cause No. 72 of 2018 despite court orders. Furthermore, the timing of the other suits did not coincide with the termination of the Claimant's employment, and the Claimant denied being a Union member or authorizing any such suit. As a result, the Court held that the Respondent had not met the threshold for transfer of the suit or for an award of costs against the Claimant. The application was dismissed with costs to the Claimant.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the claimant

Orders

  • The Respondent's Motion dated 24 October 2018 is dismissed with costs to the Claimant.
  • The Claimant to file and serve any further documents and witness statements on or before 21 April 2021.