[2019] KEELRC 2045 (KLR)
The court found that the County Government of Machakos was not the proper party to be sued in this employment dispute, as the County Public Service Board is the entity responsible for employment matters under the County Governments Act, 2012. The Claimant failed to follow the statutory procedure for redressing her...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELRC 2045 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Jessica Wanja Kinyua; Respondent: County Government of Machakos
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 349 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- preliminary objection upheld; respondent struck out from proceedings
- Judges
- HS Wasilwa
- Legal Topics
- Proper Party to Sue, Statutory Procedure, County Public Service Board, Jurisdiction, Employment Disputes
- 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
Jessica Wanja Kinyua
Claimant
County Government of Machakos
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the County Government of Machakos is the proper party to be sued in this employment dispute.
- 2 Whether the Claimant followed the statutory procedure for redressing employment grievances as stipulated in the County Governments Act, 2012.
- 3 Whether the suit is incompetent and an abuse of the court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the County Government of Machakos was not the proper party to be sued in this employment dispute, as the County Public Service Board is the entity responsible for employment matters under the County Governments Act, 2012. The Claimant failed to follow the statutory procedure for redressing her grievances, specifically the requirement to appeal to the Public Service Commission under Section 77. The court relied on established legal principles that where Parliament has provided a specific procedure for dispute resolution, that procedure must be followed before seeking judicial intervention. Consequently, the court upheld the Respondent's preliminary objection and struck...
Court Disposition
preliminary objection upheld; respondent struck out from proceedings
Orders
- The Respondent, County Government of Machakos, is struck out from these proceedings.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 349 OF 2016
(Before Hon. Justice Hellen S. Wasilwa on 26th February, 2019)
JESSICA WANJA KINYUA..............................................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
COUNTY GOVERNMENT OF MACHAKOS..........................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. Before this Honourable Court for determination, is the Respondent’s Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 23rd March 2016. The Preliminary Objection is based on the following grounds that:-
a. The Honourable Court should not entertain this suit as the Respondent is not the proper party to the proceedings by virtue of Section 57 of the County Government Act, 2012.
b. Section 77 of the County Governments Act, 2012 stipulates the right forum for the Claimant to air her grievances which proviso has been violated.
c. The suit is incompetent, bad in law, improperly filed and an abuse of the Honourable Court’s process.
2. On 20th September 2016, parties agreed to dispose of the Preliminary Objection by way of written submissions. However, the Claimant has never filed a response or submissions regarding the Preliminary Objection. Consequently, on 22nd January 2019 the Court set a ruling date for 26th February 2019 and directed that the Claimant be served.
The Respondent’s Submissions
3. In its submissions dated 4th October 2016 and filed on 5th October 2016, the Respondent submitted on the following issues: whether the Respondent is the right party to this suit and whether the present Memorandum of Claim was properly instituted given that a statutory procedure for redressing the complaints exists.
4. The Respondent submits that Section 57 and Part VII of the County Governments Act 2012 outlines the right party to these proceedings as the County Public Service Board in each County since it is the one involved in the hiring and firing of staff.
5. The Respondent further submits that the Claimant has not followed the right procedure as stipulated in Section 77 of the Act which provides that any person dissatisfied by the decision of the County Public Service Board, should appeal to the Public Service Commission which can entertain an appeal on any decision relating to the employment of a person in a County Government.
6. The Respondent relies on the case of Luka Angaiya Lubwayo vs. Another vs. Gerald Otieno Kajwang & Another [2013] eKLR where the Court relied on the cases of International Centre for Policy and Conflict & 4 Others vs. the Hon. Uhuru Kenyatta & Others Petition No. 552 of 2012 and Speaker of National Assembly vs. Njenga Karume [2008] 1 KLR 425 to hold that the unlimited jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be invoked where Parliament has specifically and expressly prescribed procedures for handling grievances raised by Petitioners.
7. I have examined the averments and submissions of the Respondent/Applicant herein. The Claimant has indeed sued the County Government of Machakos, the Respondent herein who deny it ever employed the Claimant. It is also true that under the County Government Act 2012, Part VII establishes the County Public Service Board which has the capacity to sue and be sued and its functions include hiring and firing of staff in the County.
8. The Respondent is therefore not the proper party to be sued herein. I agree with the Respondent’s contention that they are improperly sued herein and therefore the Preliminary Objection has merit. I therefore strike the Respondent herein from these proceedings.
Dated and delivered in open Court this 26th day of February, 2019.
HON. LADY JUSTICE HELLEN WASILWA
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Malelu for Respondent – Present
No appearance for Claimant