[2017] KEELRC 639 (KLR)
The court held that the application for review did not meet the threshold set out under rule 32 of the court rules. The issues raised by the applicant amounted to a critique of the judgment and alleged contradictions, which are not errors apparent on the face of the record but are matters for appeal. The court found...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELRC 639 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kennedy Otieno Oluoch; Respondent: Roto Moulders
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1919 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- DI Wasike, MN Nduma
- Legal Topics
- Review of Judgment, Apparent Error on Record, Grounds for Review, Unfair Termination, Contradictory Judgment
- 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
Kennedy Otieno Oluoch
Applicant
Roto Moulders
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there were errors apparent on the face of the record warranting review of the judgment.
- 2 Whether the application for review was a proper remedy or whether the issues raised should be grounds for appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the application for review did not meet the threshold set out under rule 32 of the court rules. The issues raised by the applicant amounted to a critique of the judgment and alleged contradictions, which are not errors apparent on the face of the record but are matters for appeal. The court found no sufficient ground to review its earlier judgment and dismissed the application as lacking merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application for review is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF
KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NUMBER 1919 OF 2013
KENNEDY OTIENO OLUOCH……………….……..CLAIMANT
VERSUS
ROTO MOULDERS………………………….....RESPONDENT
RULING
1. By a Motion dated 2nd August, 2016 the applicant seeks review of the court’s judgement delivered on 17th June, 2016. The application was based on the grounds among others that there were apparent errors on the face of the record which required that the judgement be reviewed.
2. The applicant complained that whereas the court found that the claimant had not provided sufficient evidence that he had been unfairly terminated, the court went ahead and made an award in favour of the same claimant.
3. The applicant further accused the judge of contradicting himself in the said judgement. The grounds for which a court can review its judgement are clearly set out under rule 32 of the court rules. The court has considered the present application and the grounds upon which it has been brought and is of the view that it is more of an attack and critique of the said judgement which should properly form grounds of appeal against the judgement and not review.
4. The court therefore finds the application without merit and hereby dismisses the same with costs.
5. It is so ordered.
Dated at Nairobi this 22nd day of September, 2017
ABUODHA J. N.
JUDGE
Delivered this 22nd day of September, 2017
NDERI NDUMA
JUDGE
In the presence of:
………......for Claimant
………for Respondent