[2019] KEELRC 1310 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 1310 (KLR)

The court found that the appellant had provided adequate explanation for the delay in prosecuting the appeal, including evidence of repeated requests for certified copies of proceedings and judgment and attempts to comply with the stay order by sending the decretal amount for deposit in a joint account. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELRC 1310 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Hantex Garments [EPZ] Ltd; Respondent: Evans Makori Ibencho
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 7 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
application for dismissal of appeal declined
Judges
J Rika
Legal Topics
Work Injury Claims, Appeal Procedure, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Work Injury Claims Appeal Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

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

Hantex Garments [EPZ] Ltd

Appellant

Evans Makori Ibencho

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to delay by the appellant.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant provided adequate explanation for the delay in prosecuting the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant had provided adequate explanation for the delay in prosecuting the appeal, including evidence of repeated requests for certified copies of proceedings and judgment and attempts to comply with the stay order by sending the decretal amount for deposit in a joint account. The respondent's advocates did not facilitate the opening of the joint account, and there was no indication that the appellant was deliberately delaying the appeal. The court held that the appellant's conduct did not amount to indolence or lack of interest, and there was no justification for dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution at this stage.

Court Disposition

application for dismissal of appeal declined

Orders

  • The application filed by the respondent on 12th June 2018, seeking dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution is declined.
  • No order on the costs.