[2021] KEELRC 1257 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 1257 (KLR)

The court found that the preliminary objection raised by the respondents did not disclose grounds sufficient to dispose of the appeal without a hearing on the merits. The issues raised, including the applicability of sections 51 and 52 of the Work Injury Benefits Act and Rule 8 of the Employment and Labour Relations...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 1257 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Edwin Songoroh; Appellant: Edson Conveyors Limited; Respondent: Amony Koech Yatich; Respondent: Moran Auctioneers
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Appeal E017 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Employment and Labour Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection dismissed
Judges
B Ongaya
Legal Topics
Work Injury Benefits, Preliminary Objection, Execution of Judgments
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Work Injury Benefits Preliminary Objection Execution of Judgments

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

Edwin Songoroh

Appellant

Edson Conveyors Limited

Appellant

Amony Koech Yatich

Respondent

Moran Auctioneers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment and Labour Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the preliminary objection raised by the respondents is meritorious and capable of disposing of the appeal without a hearing on merits.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal is contrary to sections 51 and 52 of the Work Injury Benefits Act and Rule 8 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the preliminary objection raised by the respondents did not disclose grounds sufficient to dispose of the appeal without a hearing on the merits. The issues raised, including the applicability of sections 51 and 52 of the Work Injury Benefits Act and Rule 8 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016, were not directly addressed in the ruling under appeal and should be considered at the full hearing. The court held that whether the remedies sought in the memorandum of appeal are available is a substantive issue for determination after hearing the appeal, not at the preliminary stage. Accordingly, the preliminary objection was dismissed.

Court Disposition

preliminary objection dismissed

Orders

  • The preliminary objection is dismissed with costs in the cause.
  • Parties to take steps towards expeditious hearing of the appeal on merits.