[2018] KEELRC 515 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 515 (KLR)

The court found that the 1st Respondent and its members had not complied with the judgment requiring the Petitioners' retention on the payroll and payment of the decretal sum. Despite their appearance and claims of having issued instructions for payment, the court held that the responsibility for compliance rested...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 515 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Grace N. Makori; Applicant: Isaac Ngotho Maina & 175 Others; Respondent: Murang’a County Public Service Board; Respondent: Public Service Commission; Respondent: Ministry of Health
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 1 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application / Ruling on Contempt and Compliance With Court Orders
Outcome
Members of the 1st Respondent found in contempt of court; sentencing deferred to allow for compliance.
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Public Service Employment, Enforcement of Judgments, County Government Responsibilities
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Contempt of Court Public Service Employment Enforcement of Judgments County Government Responsibilities

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

Grace N. Makori

Applicant

Isaac Ngotho Maina & 175 Others

Applicant

Murang’a County Public Service Board

Respondent

Public Service Commission

Respondent

Ministry of Health

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application / Ruling on Contempt and Compliance With Court Orders

  1. 1 Whether the 1st Respondent and its members complied with the court order to retain the Petitioners on the payroll and pay the decretal sum.
  2. 2 Whether the members of the County Public Service Board are in contempt of court for non-compliance with the judgment of 8th May 2015.
  3. 3 What consequences should follow the finding of contempt.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 1st Respondent and its members had not complied with the judgment requiring the Petitioners' retention on the payroll and payment of the decretal sum. Despite their appearance and claims of having issued instructions for payment, the court held that the responsibility for compliance rested with the Board and its members as per the judgment and Section 59 of the County Government Act. Their failure to effect payment and implement the orders amounted to contempt of court. However, given that a request for payment had been made, the court deferred sentencing to allow time for compliance, warning that failure to pay by the next hearing would result in dire...

Court Disposition

Members of the 1st Respondent found in contempt of court; sentencing deferred to allow for compliance.

Orders

  • Members of the County Public Service Board convicted of contempt of court.
  • Sentencing deferred to 15th November 2018 to allow for payment of the decretal sum.