[2023] KEELRC 496 (KLR)

[2023] KEELRC 496 (KLR)

The court found that it could not conclusively determine whether the doctrine of sub judice applied because the parties had not provided pleadings, proceedings, or orders from CMEL Cause No 2382 of 2019. However, the court noted that the claimant's monthly salary and the nature of the claim made the Chief...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELRC 496 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joseph Kamau Kariuki; Respondent: Climax Coaches Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 231 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
claim transferred to chief magistrate's court
Judges
J Rika
Legal Topics
Sub Judice, Unfair Termination, Jurisdiction, Transfer of Suit
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Sub Judice Unfair Termination Jurisdiction Transfer of Suit

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Kamau Kariuki

Applicant

Climax Coaches Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the doctrine of sub judice applies to bar the current claim.
  2. 2 Whether the Employment and Labour Relations Court has jurisdiction over the claim given the claimant's salary and the subject matter.
  3. 3 Whether the representation of the claimant by a non-advocate is proper.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that it could not conclusively determine whether the doctrine of sub judice applied because the parties had not provided pleadings, proceedings, or orders from CMEL Cause No 2382 of 2019. However, the court noted that the claimant's monthly salary and the nature of the claim made the Chief Magistrate’s Court the appropriate forum for hearing the matter. The court also observed irregularity in the claimant's representation by a non-advocate, but deferred that issue for argument at the appropriate forum. Consequently, the court ordered the transfer of the claim to the Chief Magistrate’s Court Milimani Nairobi for hearing and disposal.

Court Disposition

claim transferred to chief magistrate's court

Orders

  • The claim is transferred to the Chief Magistrate’s Court Milimani Nairobi for hearing and disposal.
  • Costs in the cause.