[2021] KEELRC 20 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 20 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant failed to extract and serve summons as required by Rule 11 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016. Without proper service of summons, there was no obligation on the respondent to enter appearance or file a response within the prescribed time. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 20 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: George Otieno; Respondent: Kenya Kazi Services Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause E6592 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Application to Strike Out Response
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
M Mbarũ
Legal Topics
Service of Summons, Filing of Pleadings, Formal Proof, Court Procedure, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Service of Summons Filing of Pleadings Formal Proof Court Procedure Costs Award

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Otieno

Claimant

Kenya Kazi Services Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Application to Strike Out Response

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's response should be struck out for being filed out of time and without leave of court.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant properly served summons as required by the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016.
  3. 3 Whether the matter should proceed for formal proof in the absence of a timely response.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant failed to extract and serve summons as required by Rule 11 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016. Without proper service of summons, there was no obligation on the respondent to enter appearance or file a response within the prescribed time. The respondent's attendance by appointment of advocate and subsequent filing of a response was proper in the circumstances. As such, the response filed by the respondent was deemed properly on record, and the claimant's application to strike out the response and proceed by formal proof was dismissed for lack of merit. The respondent was awarded costs of the application.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application dated 17th October, 2021 is dismissed.
  • The response dated 7th September, 2021 is properly on record.