[2018] KEELRC 1074 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 1074 (KLR)

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the application for review because an appeal had already been preferred to the Court of Appeal. Rule 33 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016, expressly provides that review is only available where no appeal has been preferred....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 1074 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Police Constable Henry Nyakoe Obuba; Respondent: National Police Service Commission; Respondent: Insp. General National Police Service; Respondent: Deputy Insp. General National Police Service; Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 14 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Review of Judgment, Reinstatement of Employee, Constitutional Rights Violation, Jurisdiction of Court
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Constitutional Law Review of Judgment Reinstatement of Employee Constitutional Rights Violation Jurisdiction of Court

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Police Constable Henry Nyakoe Obuba

Applicant

National Police Service Commission

Respondent

Insp. General National Police Service

Respondent

Deputy Insp. General National Police Service

Respondent

The Hon. Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Employment and Labour Relations Court has jurisdiction to review its judgment when an appeal has already been preferred to the Court of Appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a review of the judgment awarding reinstatement and/or compensation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the application for review because an appeal had already been preferred to the Court of Appeal. Rule 33 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016, expressly provides that review is only available where no appeal has been preferred. Since the grounds for review would be ventilated in the appellate court, it would be a waste of judicial time to consider the application further. The application for review was therefore dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed with costs to the respondent.