[2021] KEELRC 775 (KLR)
The court found that the existence and effect of the settlement agreement dated 30th January, 2020 raised disputes of fact that could not be resolved at the interlocutory stage. The court held that dismissal of the petition without a full hearing would be premature and contrary to established legal principles, which...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELRC 775 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Godfrey Ettah; Respondent: Fuzu Services Limited Mauritius Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 75 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- MN Nduma
- Legal Topics
- Employment Termination, Settlement Agreements, Jurisdiction of Court, Interlocutory Applications
- 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
Godfrey Ettah
Claimant
Fuzu Services Limited Mauritius Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the agreement dated 30th January, 2020 is valid, final, and binding between the parties.
- 2 Whether the petition should be dismissed at the interlocutory stage based on the alleged settlement agreement.
- 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction to dismiss the petition without a full hearing on the merits.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the existence and effect of the settlement agreement dated 30th January, 2020 raised disputes of fact that could not be resolved at the interlocutory stage. The court held that dismissal of the petition without a full hearing would be premature and contrary to established legal principles, which require that substantive issues be determined on their merits after hearing both parties. The application to dismiss the petition was therefore found to lack merit and was dismissed, with directions for the respondent to respond to the petition so that the matter could be determined on its merits.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 25th June, 2020 is dismissed with costs in the cause.
- The respondent is to respond to the petition to allow determination of the same on merits.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
50 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT & LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
PETITION NO. 75 OF 2020
IN THE MATTER OF
INTERPRETATION OF AND ENFORCEMENT OF
ARTICLES 22(1), 23(3), 25(a), 41, 50(1) and 258(1) OF THE CONSTITUTION
AND
IN THE MATTER OF
CONTRAVENTION F ARTICLES 22(1), 41(1), 47, 50(1) AND 258(1) OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF
SECTION 3(6), 41, 45 AND 87 OF THE EMPLOYMENT ACT. 2007
AND
IN THE MATTER OF
THE FAIR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION ACT
AND
IN THE MATTER OF
RULE 7(1) OF THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
(PROCEDURE) RULES, 2016
AND
IN THE MATTER OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA (PROTECTION OF RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL
FREEDOMS AND (PROCEDURE) RULES, 2013
GODFREY ETTAH.........................................................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
FUZU SERVICES LIMITED MAURITIUS LIMITED..........RESPONDENT
RULING
1. Serving before Court is a notice of motion dated 25th June, 2020 in which the respondent prays for an order that:-
(1) The agreement dated 30th January, 2020 is valid in law and in fact;
(2) The agreement dated 30th January, 2020 is final and binding;
(3) The petition dated the 30th April, 2020 be dismissed and costs of the suit.
2. The application is premised on grounds set out on the face of the notice of motion and buttressed in the supporting affidavit of Nelly Mutula, the Human Resource Manager of the applicant.
3. The gravamen of the application is that the applicant entered into a mutual settlement and Release Agreement (“the agreement”) with the respondent on 30/1/2020. That the said agreement followed lengthy negotiations by the parties through their respective counsel. That the agreement was duly executed by each party in the presence of their counsel. That upon execution of the agreement, the applicant fully performed its obligations under the contract without delay and without fault.
4. That in terms of the agreement, the respondent completely released, and or discharged the applicant from any further obligations or demand and so matters raised in the petition were fully compromised under the agreement.
5. That the suit therefore lacks any basis and it be summarily dismissed for want of any cause of action.
6. The respondent filed grounds of opposition dated 12/4/2021 that the Court lacks jurisdiction to deal with the application at interlocutory stage since the matters raised may only be determined upon hearing of the petition on the merits.
7. That in terms of the decision in Mbaraka Issa Kombo –vs- Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 3 others [2017] eKLR, the Court cannot dismiss a suit at interlocutory stage but may strike out the pleadings unremitting of a hearing.
8. That “dismissal of a suit only follows scrutiny of the merits of the dispute as articulated and after consideration of the facts and evidence grounding the cause.”
9. The Court has considered the application, grounds of opposition and submissions by both parties and is of the finding that the dispute of fact raised in the petition may only be determined by the Court upon hearing and determination of the petition on the merits.
10. The application lacks merit therefore and is dismissed with costs in the cause.
11. The respondent to respond to the petition to allow determination of the same on merits.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI (VIRTUALLY) THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021.
MATHEWS N. NDUMA
JUDGE
Appearances
Achoki for the Respondent/Applicant
Omollo for Petitioner/Respondent
Ekale – Court clerk.