[2022] KEELRC 12780 (KLR)
The court found that there were no pending issues between the petitioners and the respondents, as the petitioners had ceased participating in the proceedings and the 1st respondent confirmed settlement. The interested party's application to be joined as a co-petitioner was rejected because such joinder would amount...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELRC 12780 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Elija Mokaya; Applicant: Denis Ngachura; Applicant: Domnic Laisa; Applicant: Maruti Makokha; Applicant: Daniel Magero; Respondent: Kenya Railways Corporation; Respondent: Attorney General; Interested Party: Rift Valley Railway Workers Union
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 76 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Applications to Mark Petition Settled and for Joinder of Interested Party as Co Petitioner
- Outcome
- Petition marked as settled between principal parties; interested party at liberty to file fresh petition; file closed; no order as to costs.
- Judges
- J Rika
- Legal Topics
- Settlement of Labour Disputes, Joinder of Parties, Withdrawal of Petitions
- 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
Elija Mokaya
Applicant
Denis Ngachura
Applicant
Domnic Laisa
Applicant
Maruti Makokha
Applicant
Daniel Magero
Applicant
Kenya Railways Corporation
Respondent
Attorney General
Respondent
Rift Valley Railway Workers Union
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Applications to Mark Petition Settled and for Joinder of Interested Party as Co Petitioner
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petition between the principal parties has been settled.
- 2 Whether the interested party should be joined as a co-petitioner after settlement between principal parties.
- 3 Whether the interested party should file a fresh petition.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there were no pending issues between the petitioners and the respondents, as the petitioners had ceased participating in the proceedings and the 1st respondent confirmed settlement. The interested party's application to be joined as a co-petitioner was rejected because such joinder would amount to the presentation of a new petition, which is procedurally improper. The court held that the interested party should file a fresh petition if it wishes to pursue its claims, rather than continue with a petition that has been compromised by the principal parties. Accordingly, the petition was marked as settled, the file closed, and the interested party granted liberty to file...
Court Disposition
Petition marked as settled between principal parties; interested party at liberty to file fresh petition; file closed; no order as to costs.
Orders
- The petition is marked as settled between the principal parties.
- The interested party is at liberty to present a fresh petition.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
36 paragraphs
Elija Mokaya & 4 others v Kenya Railways Corporation & another; Rift Valley Railway Workers Union (Interested Party) (Petition 76 of 2017) [2022] KEELRC 12780 (KLR) (6 October 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELRC 12780 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Petition 76 of 2017
J Rika, J
October 6, 2022
Between
Elija Mokaya
1st Petitioner
Denis Ngachura
2nd Petitioner
Domnic Laisa
3rd Petitioner
Maruti Makokha
4th Petitioner
Daniel Magero
5th Petitioner
and
Kenya Railways Corporation
1st Respondent
Attorney General
2nd Respondent
and
Rift Valley Railway Workers Unionrs
Interested Party
Ruling
1. The court has read the application dated October 5, 2022 filed by the interested party, and that dated September 27, 2022, filed by the 1st respondent.
2. The 1st respondent has consistently held that the issues in dispute between the petitioners and the respondents, have been settled.
3. The 1st respondent prays the court to have the petition marked as settled.
4. The interested party holds that there is no settlement. It has presented an application to be made a co-petitioner.
5. It is the view of the court that there is no pending issue between the petitioners and the respondents. The petitioners have not been appearing in the proceedings, as the petitioners have nothing left to prosecute before this court.
6. An order for the interested party to be joined as a co-petitioner would amount to presentation of a new petition, and does not assist the court in clarification of issues.
7. The interested party, as suggested by the court in the past, ought to present a fresh petition, instead of hanging onto a petition which has been compromised by the principal parties.
It Is Ordered: -a.The petition is marked as settled between the principal parties.b.The interested party is at liberty to present a fresh petition.c.The file is closed.d.No order on the costs.
DATED SIGNED, AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, AT NAIROBI, THIS 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022. JAMES RIKAJUDGE