[2021] KEHC 888 (KLR)
The High Court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal as the dispute related to employment and labour relations, which fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court as per the Constitution. Furthermore, the High Court cited binding Court of Appeal...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 888 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Henry Andriko Shikanga; Respondent: West Kenya Sugar Co. Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 108 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal struck out for want of jurisdiction
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of High Court, Employment Disputes, Transfer of Suits, Constitutional Jurisdiction
- 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
Henry Andriko Shikanga
Appellant
West Kenya Sugar Co. Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine employment and labour relations disputes.
- 2 Whether the High Court can transfer a matter over which it lacks jurisdiction to the appropriate court.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal as the dispute related to employment and labour relations, which fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court as per the Constitution. Furthermore, the High Court cited binding Court of Appeal authority that it cannot transfer a matter over which it has no jurisdiction to the appropriate court. Consequently, the appeal was found to be incompetent and was struck out with costs awarded to the respondent.
Court Disposition
appeal struck out for want of jurisdiction
Orders
- The appeal is struck out for want of jurisdiction.
- The respondent shall have the costs of the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 108 OF 2018
HENRY ANDRIKO SHIKANGA.........................................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
WEST KENYA SUGAR CO. LTD.......................................................REPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. According to the plaint filed in the primary suit, dated 28th April 2015, and amended on 30th June 2016 and 25th August 2017, the appellant herein was an employee of the respondent. That would mean that there was an employer-employee relationship between them, and the dispute before the court related to employment and labour relations. The High Court has no jurisdiction, since 2010, to handle disputes that turn on employment and labour relations, by dint of Articles 162(2) and 165(5) of the Constitution of Kenya. That would mean that I have no jurisdiction to handle the appeal herein.
2. According to the Court of Appeal, inPhoenix of EA Assurance Company Limited vs. SM Thiga t/a Newspaper Service[2019] eKLR (Karanja, Gatembu & Sichale JJA) andEquity Bank Limited vs. Bruce Mutie Mutuku t/a Diani Tour Travel[2016] eKLR (Makhandia, Ouko & M’Inoti JJA), where the High Court has no jurisdction over a matter before it, it would have no jurisdiction, under sections 17 and 18 of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21, Laws of Kenya, to transfer the matter, in respect of which it has no jurisdiction, to the court with jurisdiction.
3. The appeal before me was filed at the wrong forum, before a court which has no jurisdiction to entertain it. It is, therefore, incompetent. It is accordingly struck out. The respondent shall have the costs.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT KAKAMEGA THIS 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER,2021
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE
In the presences of:-
Erick Zalo - Court Assistant
N/A for parties