[2019] KEELRC 748 (KLR)
The court found that the claimant failed to take any action to prosecute the claim since its filing in December 2015, including failure to serve the summons and statement of claim upon the respondent. There was no evidence of attempts at out-of-court settlement or any affidavit from the claimant expressing interest...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELRC 748 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Godfrey Gitau Kimani; Respondent: Easy Coach Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 2159 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Claim
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- DO Ogal
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Reinstatement of Suit, Service of Process, Limitation Periods
- 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 Gitau Kimani
Applicant
Easy Coach Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Claim
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the dismissal of the claim for want of prosecution should be reviewed and set aside.
- 2 Whether the claim should be reinstated for hearing.
- 3 Whether the claim was time-barred under the Employment Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimant failed to take any action to prosecute the claim since its filing in December 2015, including failure to serve the summons and statement of claim upon the respondent. There was no evidence of attempts at out-of-court settlement or any affidavit from the claimant expressing interest in prosecuting the claim. The confusion regarding the notice to show cause dates did not excuse the lack of prosecution or service. Furthermore, the claim was time-barred, having been filed more than three years after the claimant's summary dismissal. The court concluded that there was no claim to reinstate and dismissed the application to set aside the dismissal for want of...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The claimant's application dated 14th February 2019 is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE 2159 OF 2015
(Before Hon. Lady Justice Maureen Onyango)
GODFREY GITAU KIMANI...............................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
EASY COACH LIMITED..............................................RESPONDENT
RULING
The claimant’s case herein was on 7th February 2019 dismissed for want of prosecution following the failure of the parties to appear in court after being served with a notice to show cause.
By notice of motion dated 14th February 2019 and filed on 15th February 2019, the claimant/applicant seeks orders as follows-
a) That the orders made herein on 7th February 2019 be reviewed and set aside.
b) That the claim be reinstated for hearing.
c) That the costs of this application be provided for.
In the grounds in support of the application and in the supporting affidavit of JOHN KAIRIE NJUGUNA, Counsel for the applicant, he states that the Advocates of the claimant were served with notice to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution on 23rd January 2019. The notice required the claimant to appear in court on 1st February 2019.
Counsel deposes that he attended court on 1st February 2019 but the case was not in the cause list. He inquired at the registry and was informed the date was erroneous as the correct date for hearing of the notice to show cause was 11th February 2019. That when he want to court on 11th February 2019 the matter had again not been cause listed. Upon inquiry at the registry, he was informed that the case came up for notice to show cause on 7th February 2019 and was dismissed.
He states that the claimant is keen to prosecute his claim, that the prosecution was held back to await an out of court settlement which has since failed to materialise.
The application was heard on 14th May 2019 when Mr. Nyakeri holding brief for Mr. Kiarie, reiterated the averments in Mr. Kiarie’s affidavit.
I have perused the file. I note that since the claim was filed on 7th December 2015 no action has been taken to prosecute the same. There is no evince that summons and statement of claim were ever served upon the respondent. The application herein was also not served upon the respondent.
Although counsel states in the affidavit that the non-prosecution was as a result of attempts at out of court settlement, no evidence of the same has been submitted to court. The claimant himself has not sworn an affidavit to express his interest in prosecuting his claim.
The first entry on the file by way of proceedings is the 7th February 2019 when the claim was dismissed for want of prosecution.
I agree with the claimant’s counsel that there appears to have been some confusion in the service of notice to show cause as there are two notices on the court file, one dated 17th January 2019 requiring the parties to appear in court on 11th February 2019 which has an alteration on the dates, and the other dated 28th January requiring the parties to appear in court on 7th February 2019. The one attached to the affidavit in support of the application is dated 17th January 2019 but has a date of 1st February 2019.
Had there been proof of action taken to prosecute the claim, or had the claimant even demonstrated that the summons were actually served upon the respondent, I would have given him the benefit of doubt. As it were, there is no claim to reinstate as the one on record lapsed upon failure of the claimant to serve the same on the respondent.
There is further no evidence of attempts to settle the matter out of court, which again would have demonstrated that there was engagement of the respondent.
Further, the letter of summary dismissal of the claimant which is part of his documents on record, is dated 16th July 2012 while the claim was filed on 7th December 2015, which would make it time barred as the claim should have been filed latest by 16th July 2015.
Whichever way one looks at the claim, it is not capable of being salvaged. It was dead on arrival, a stillbirth.
For these reasons, the claimant’s application dated 14th February 2019 is dismissed.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI ON THIS 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019
MAUREEN ONYANGO
JUDGE