[2020] KEELRC 143 (KLR)
The court found that the preliminary objection did not meet the threshold of a pure point of law as defined in the Mukisa Biscuit case, because the pleadings raised contested factual issues, particularly regarding the roles of the respondents in the claimant's alleged engagement. The court held that these factual...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELRC 143 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Joseph Jumaa Kazungu; Respondent: The Deputy Vice Chancellor Moi University, Eldoret; Respondent: The Director, Moi University Coast Campus; Respondent: The Deputy Vice Chancellor Finance, Eldoret
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 86 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- preliminary objection overruled
- Judges
- L Ndolo
- Legal Topics
- Capacity to Sue and Be Sued, Joinder of Parties, Universities Act Interpretation
- 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
Joseph Jumaa Kazungu
Claimant
The Deputy Vice Chancellor Moi University, Eldoret
Respondent
The Director, Moi University Coast Campus
Respondent
The Deputy Vice Chancellor Finance, Eldoret
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondents are proper parties to be sued in an employment dispute involving Moi University.
- 2 Whether the suit offends the provisions of the Universities Act regarding the corporate status of Moi University.
- 3 Whether the preliminary objection raises a pure point of law as defined in Mukisa Biscuit case.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the preliminary objection did not meet the threshold of a pure point of law as defined in the Mukisa Biscuit case, because the pleadings raised contested factual issues, particularly regarding the roles of the respondents in the claimant's alleged engagement. The court held that these factual matters merit examination and determination at a full trial, and therefore the objection could not be sustained at this stage. The objection was overruled with costs in the cause.
Court Disposition
preliminary objection overruled
Orders
- The respondents' preliminary objection is overruled with costs in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT MOMBASA
CAUSE NO 86 OF 2019
JOSEPH JUMAA KAZUNGU........................................................................................CLAIMANT
VS
THE DEPUTY VICE CHANCELLOR MOI UNIVERSITY, ELDORET.......1ST RESPONDENT
THE DIRECTOR, MOI UNIVERSITY COAST CAMPUS..............................2ND RESPONDENT
THE DEPUTY VICE CHANCELLOR FINANCE, ELDORET........................3RD RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This ruling relates to the Respondents’ Preliminary Objection raised by notice dated 4th March 2020 and filed in court on 9th March 2020.
2. The gist of the Objection is that the Respondents are wrongly sued in this matter. It is based on the following grounds:
a) The suit herein offends Section 15(1)(a) of the Universities Act No 42 of 2012, which provides that Moi University is a body corporate capable of suing and being sued, in its own name;
b) Moi University, having been a public university before commencement of the Universities Act No 42 of 2012, is deemed by dint of Section 72 to be a university established under the Act, after having obtained a charter in accordance with the provisions of the Act and as such the provisions of the Universities Act No 42 of 2012 apply to it;
c) By dint of Section 20(1)(a), Moi University, upon being granted a charter became a body corporate with wide powers, including employment of staff;
d) Consequently, the import of the foregoing provisions of law is that to the extent that the crux of the Claimant’s claim is to enforce rights, apparently accruing from an employer-employee relationship, the proper party to be joined and against whom the orders sought can be enforced is Moi University, as a juridical person and not the individuals named as 1st-3rd Respondents, as they also happen to be employees with no capacity to be sued on behalf of Moi University, their employer;
e) Therefore, the suit as framed, and to the extent that the grievances are against Moi University but has enjoined individuals, it is null and void ab initio and there does not exist a suit at all against Moi University;
f) The joinder of the Respondents in these proceedings, in light of the fact that they are not the custodians of the University’s recruitment procedure, is a nullity in law that is fatally incurable.
3. In reaction to the Preliminary Objection, the Claimant filed written submissions on 1st July 2020.
4. As defined in the celebrated case of Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Co. Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd (1969) a Preliminary Objection is one which raises a pure point of law and is argued on the assumption that all facts as pleaded are not in dispute.
5. The pleadings filed by the parties raise many issues of fact that are contested. Significantly, the role played by the Respondents in the alleged engagement of the Claimant is a key issue, meriting examination and determination, at a full trial.
6. In the result, I find and hold that the Respondent’s Objection does not meet the threshold of a Preliminary Objection as defined in law.
7. The Objection is therefore overruled with costs in the cause.
8. Orders accordingly.
DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MOMBASA THIS 10TH DAY DECEMBER 2020
LINNET NDOLO
JUDGE
ORDER
In view of restrictions in physical court operations occasioned by the COVID-19 Pandemic, this ruling has been delivered via Microsoft Teams Online Platform. A signed copy will be availed to each party upon payment of court fees.
LINNET NDOLO
JUDGE
Appearance:
Mr. Aminga for the Claimant
Miss Kaguri for the Respondent