[2020] KEELRC 1624 (KLR)
The court found that the Claimant took approximately seven months to file the application to review and set aside the dismissal order, with no explanation provided for this delay. The court also noted that the Claimant's advocate failed to provide sufficient details or evidence regarding his alleged engagement in...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELRC 1624 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Judy Wamaitha Mwangi; Respondent: Paul Mopel; Respondent: California Bar & Butchery
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 2116 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal for Non Attendance
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs to the respondents
- Judges
- MSA Makhandia
- Legal Topics
- Review of Dismissal Orders, Non Attendance, Exercise of Discretion, Delay in Prosecution
- 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
Judy Wamaitha Mwangi
Applicant
Paul Mopel
Respondent
California Bar & Butchery
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal for Non Attendance
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should review and set aside the order dismissing the application dated 21st January 2019 for non-attendance.
- 2 Whether the Claimant provided sufficient explanation for the delay in filing the application and for non-attendance on the hearing date.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Claimant took approximately seven months to file the application to review and set aside the dismissal order, with no explanation provided for this delay. The court also noted that the Claimant's advocate failed to provide sufficient details or evidence regarding his alleged engagement in another court, such as the specific court, judicial officer, or supporting documentation. Additionally, the Claimant did not disclose the identity of the representative allegedly sent to seek an adjournment, nor was there any affidavit from this person. The court held that the delay was inordinate and unexplained, and that the Claimant had not demonstrated sufficient interest or...
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs to the respondents
Orders
- The application dated 6 September 2019 is dismissed with costs to the Respondents.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 2116 OF 2015
JUDY WAMAITHA MWANGI ..........................CLAIMANT
V
PAUL MOPEL ...........................................1ST RESPONDENT
CALIFORNIA BAR & BUTCHERY.......2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
1. When the Cause came up for hearing on 31 July 2018, the Claimant, her advocate on record and the Respondent were not in Court, and the Court dismissed the Cause (the Deputy Registrar had fixed the hearing date in the presence of advocates for both parties).
2. On 23 January 2019, the Claimant filed an application seeking an order reviewing and setting aside the order dismissing the Cause.
3. The Claimant caused the application to be scheduled for hearing on 18 February 2019.
4. When the application was called out for hearing at 9. 10 am, the Claimant and/or her advocate were not in Court and the Court dismissed the application.
5. 7 months later, on 19 September 2019, the Claimant filed another application seeking orders
1. That this Honourable Court be pleased to review and set aside the orders dismissing the application dated 21st January 2019 for non-attendance.
2. That this Honourable Court be pleased to allow the Claimant herein to prosecute her claim.
3. That costs of this application be in the cause.
6. The reasons advanced in support of the application were that the failure to attend Court on 18 February 2019 was not intentional as the advocate on record was held up in High Court Succession Cause No. 2431 of 2010, and that he had sent a representative to seek an adjournment but the application was dismissed before the advocate could address the Court.
7. The advocate on record for the Respondents filed a replying affidavit in opposition to the application wherein it was asserted that the Claimant had not presented any justifiable reason to warrant the orders sought and that the Claimant had shown disinterest in her claim. The delay in filing the application was cited.
8. The Claimant filed submissions in support of the application on 25 November 2019 while the Respondents filed their submissions on 27 November 2019.
9. The Court has given keen attention to the record, the application, affidavits in support and opposition thereto and the submissions.
10. It took the Claimant about 7 months to file the application under consideration. There has been no explanation at all as to why it had to take that long if indeed the Claimant had an interest in her suit.
11. The delay, in the view of the Court, was inordinate, and because the Claimant did not provide any explanation, the Court is minded not to exercise its discretion in favour of the Claimant.
12. On the merits of the application, the Claimant’s advocate on record contended that he was before another Court, but apart from making reference to his diary, did not disclose the particular Court the said Cause was in. The name of the judicial officer was not stated nor was a copy of the cause-list for the day exhibited.
13. Further, the Claimant has asserted that an advocate was requested to address the Court without disclosing the identity of the said advocate. There is even no affidavit from the Clerk/representative who was sent to Court to seek an advocate to hold brief.
14. From the foregoing, the Court finds no merit in the application dated 6 September 2019, and orders it dismissed with costs to the Respondents.
Delivered, dated and signed in Nairobi on this 7th day of February 2020.
Radido Stephen
Judge
Appearances
For Claimant Ngugi Mwaniki & Co. Advocates
For Respondents Nyokabi Waiganjo, Omung’ala & Associates Advocates
Court Assistant Judy Maina