[2019] KEELRC 873 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 873 (KLR)

The court found that the Claimant's failure to comply with previous directions was due to the notice being served on the previous advocates, and the current advocate was only informed of the notice shortly before the hearing. Since the Respondent did not oppose the application and the facts were not controverted,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELRC 873 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Eric Mwau David; Respondent: The Trustees and Registered Trustees Scott Christian University
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1215 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Application for Reinstatement After Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Application for reinstatement allowed with conditions.
Judges
MSA Makhandia
Legal Topics
Reinstatement of Suit, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Mistake of Advocate, Notice to Show Cause
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Reinstatement of Suit Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Mistake of Advocate Notice to Show Cause

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eric Mwau David

Claimant

The Trustees and Registered Trustees Scott Christian University

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Application for Reinstatement After Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be reinstated after dismissal for want of prosecution.
  2. 2 Whether the mistake of an advocate in failing to respond to a notice to show cause should be visited upon the litigant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Claimant's failure to comply with previous directions was due to the notice being served on the previous advocates, and the current advocate was only informed of the notice shortly before the hearing. Since the Respondent did not oppose the application and the facts were not controverted, the court exercised its discretion to reinstate the suit, subject to the condition that the Claimant files and serves an Amended Statement of Claim by 25 September 2019. Failure to comply would result in the suit standing dismissed without further reference to the court. The court emphasized that the mistake of an advocate should not be visited upon the litigant in the...

Court Disposition

Application for reinstatement allowed with conditions.

Orders

  • The suit is reinstated on condition that the Claimant files and serves an Amended Statement of Claim on or before 25 September 2019.
  • In default of compliance, the Cause will stand dismissed as previously ordered without further reference to the court.