[2017] KEELRC 1524 (KLR)
The Court found that there had been a prolonged period of inactivity in the prosecution of the Cause, with the Claimant's advocate repeatedly citing inability to trace the Claimant as the reason for delay. Given that approximately two years had elapsed since the last action and no satisfactory progress had been...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELRC 1524 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: John Nyangacha Onduko; Respondent: Dormans Coffee Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 647 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- Cause dismissed for want of prosecution with no order as to costs.
- Judges
- MSA Makhandia
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Delay in Prosecution, Court Discretion, Absence of Claimant
- 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
John Nyangacha Onduko
Claimant
Dormans Coffee Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Cause should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to prolonged inactivity by the Claimant.
- 2 Whether the Claimant's advocate's request for more time to locate the Claimant should be granted.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that there had been a prolonged period of inactivity in the prosecution of the Cause, with the Claimant's advocate repeatedly citing inability to trace the Claimant as the reason for delay. Given that approximately two years had elapsed since the last action and no satisfactory progress had been made, the Court determined that it could not continue to indulge the Claimant's advocate's requests for more time. The Court exercised its discretion to dismiss the Cause for want of prosecution, finding that the delay was inordinate and unjustified, and that the interests of justice required finality in litigation.
Court Disposition
Cause dismissed for want of prosecution with no order as to costs.
Orders
- The Cause is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- There is no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 647 OF 2013
JOHN NYANGACHA ONDUKO CLAIMANT
v
DORMANS COFFEE LIMITED RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The Cause was filed on 9 May 2013 and a Response was filed on 23 May 2013.
2. The last action on the file was on 5 December 2015 when the Claimant’s advocate on record informed the Court that they had been unable to trace the Claimant.
3. On 8 March 2017, the Deputy Registrar issued a hearing notice and when the Cause was initially called out, the Respondent, considering the absence of the Claimant and/or his legal representative applied to have the Cause dismissed for want of prosecution.
4. The Court scheduled ruling on the Respondent’s application for 6 April 2017 but before the Court rose, the Claimant’s Advocate appeared in Court and sought for more time to locate the Claimant.
5. It is clear that about 2 years have elapsed after the Claimant’s advocate had given the same reason for not proceeding with the Cause and in the circumstances the Court is unable to concede to the application for more time.
6. The Court orders that the Cause be dismissed with no order as to costs.
Delivered, dated and signed in Nairobi on this 6th day of April 2017.
Radido Stephen
Judge
Appearances
For Claimant Mr. Webale instructed by Webale B & Associates Advocates
For Respondent Mr. Weru instructed by Obura Mbeche & Co. Advocates
Court Assistant Nixon