[2014] KEELRC 1290 (KLR)
The court found that the continued extension of interim ex-parte orders was contrary to Rule 16(8)(b) of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules 2010, which prohibits extension beyond fourteen days. The court also determined that the issues raised in the interlocutory applications, including the dispute over union...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEELRC 1290 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joanes Owino Okoth; Applicant: Samuel Munguti; Applicant: Kenya Hotels and Allied Workers Union; Respondent: David Muli & 16 Others
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 2048 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Employment and Labour Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications
- Outcome
- All pending interlocutory applications dispensed with; parties directed to prosecute the main suit.
- Legal Topics
- Trade Union Leadership Dispute, Interlocutory Applications, Union Accountability
- 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
Joanes Owino Okoth
Applicant
Samuel Munguti
Applicant
Kenya Hotels and Allied Workers Union
Applicant
David Muli & 16 Others
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment and Labour Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 Who are the rightful holders of the official positions of the 3rd Claimant union.
- 2 Whether the 2nd Claimant (Treasurer) should render accounts of the 3rd Claimant in respect of money received and paid out by the Union.
- 3 Whether interlocutory applications should be dispensed with pending determination of the main suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the continued extension of interim ex-parte orders was contrary to Rule 16(8)(b) of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules 2010, which prohibits extension beyond fourteen days. The court also determined that the issues raised in the interlocutory applications, including the dispute over union leadership and the demand for financial accounting, involved material factual disputes that should be resolved in the main suit. Proliferation of interlocutory applications was deemed to unnecessarily prolong the dispute and was not in the best interest of the union. Therefore, the court dispensed with all pending interlocutory applications and directed the parties to proceed to...
Court Disposition
All pending interlocutory applications dispensed with; parties directed to prosecute the main suit.
Orders
- All pending interlocutory applications are dispensed with.
- Parties are directed to prosecute the main suit being the memorandum of claim dated 20th December, 2013.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 2048 OF 2013
JOANES OWINO OKOTH (Secretary General).……….1st CLAIMANT
SAMUEL MUNGUTI (National Treasurer)….………...2nd CLAIMANT
KENYA HOTELS AND ALLIED
WORKERS UNION…………………………………………..3RD CLAIMANT
-VERSUS-
DAVID MULI & 16 OTHERS……..…………..............RESPONDENTS
Mr. Ongoto for the 1st 2nd and 3rd Claimants
Ms. Warui for the 1st and 2nd Respondents
RULING
Two applications dated 20th December, 2013 and another dated 20th February, 2014 are pending before court. Initially Hon. Rika, J had granted interim orders in the application dated 20th December, 2014.
On 20th March 2014, I declined to extend the interim orders granted by Hon. Rika, Jnoting that continued extension of the orders was in violation of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules 2010 Rule 16 (8) (b)which reads;
“an ex-parte order shall be granted once for a period of fourteen days and shall not be extended”
The court notes that the two applications, though different revolve around the same subject matter, being to establish the rightful holders of the official positions of the 3rd Claimant union and therefore determine who between the protagonists should transact the business of 3rd Claimant.
The application dated 20th February, 2014 requires the 2nd Claimant (Treasurer) to render accounts of the 3rd Claimant in respect of money received and paid out by the Union.
There are material disputes of fact that require resolution and in the court’s view need to await the determination of the main suit herein. This will not only serve the interest of the parties herein but in my view will result in economical use of the court’s time.
The dispute between the protagonists herein has been protracted and is not in the interest of the 3rd Claimant (Kenya Hotels & Allied Workers Union). The proliferated interlocutory applications will only compound this dispute.
Accordingly, the court dispenses with all pending interlocutory applications herein and direct the parties to prosecute the main suit herein being the memorandum of claim dated 20th December, 2013 and filed on the same date.
Dated and signed at Nairobi this 11th day of August, 2014.
MATHEWS N. NDUMA
PRINCIPAL JUDGE
Read and delivered in open court by this 11th day of August, 2014