[2022] KEELRC 969 (KLR)

[2022] KEELRC 969 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant failed to comply with its order of 16th October 2020, which required the filing of a proper verifying affidavit within 30 days. The purported second verifying affidavit was not shown to have been filed within the required period, nor was it properly brought to the court's attention...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELRC 969 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Emmanuel Obingo Okumu; Respondent: Pastor Eliezer Kiratu; Respondent: Supervisor Florence Ochieng; Respondent: The Manager, Kenya Assemblies of God Olympic and Childlife Vocational Training Centre Olympic
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 2362 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Compliance With Court Order Regarding Verifying Affidavit
Outcome
claim struck out
Judges
J Rika
Legal Topics
Verifying Affidavit, Striking Out Pleadings, Procedural Compliance
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Verifying Affidavit Striking Out Pleadings Procedural Compliance

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Emmanuel Obingo Okumu

Claimant

Pastor Eliezer Kiratu

Respondent

Supervisor Florence Ochieng

Respondent

The Manager, Kenya Assemblies of God Olympic and Childlife Vocational Training Centre Olympic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Compliance With Court Order Regarding Verifying Affidavit

  1. 1 Whether the claimant complied with the court's order to file a proper verifying affidavit within 30 days of the ruling dated 16th October 2020.
  2. 2 Whether the absence of a compliant verifying affidavit warrants striking out the claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant failed to comply with its order of 16th October 2020, which required the filing of a proper verifying affidavit within 30 days. The purported second verifying affidavit was not shown to have been filed within the required period, nor was it properly brought to the court's attention during the relevant hearing. The absence of a compliant verifying affidavit constituted a fundamental defect in the claim, justifying the striking out of the claim despite the court's previous accommodation of the claimant's procedural lapse.

Court Disposition

claim struck out

Orders

  • The claim is struck out.
  • No order on the costs.