[2022] KEELRC 3867 (KLR)

[2022] KEELRC 3867 (KLR)

The court held that the respondents' oral application to be discharged from the proceedings was procedurally improper, as such applications must be made formally to allow the claimant an opportunity to respond. The court found the oral application to be mischievous and dismissed it, confirming that the orders issued...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELRC 3867 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya National Union of Service Employers; Respondent: Kamongo Waste Paper (K) Ltd; Respondent: Retial Management Solutions
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause E298 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Cause / Ruling on Oral Application to Discharge Respondents
Outcome
Oral application by respondents to be discharged from proceedings dismissed; previous orders requiring parties to file responses and proceed to hearing confirmed.
Judges
AN Mwaure
Legal Topics
Striking Out Parties, Oral Applications, Procedural Fairness, Court Discretion
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Striking Out Parties Oral Applications Procedural Fairness Court Discretion

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya National Union of Service Employers

Applicant

Kamongo Waste Paper (K) Ltd

Respondent

Retial Management Solutions

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Cause / Ruling on Oral Application to Discharge Respondents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents can be discharged from the proceedings through an oral application without a formal application.
  2. 2 Whether the court should uphold the orders issued on May 19, 2022 requiring parties to file responses and proceed to hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the respondents' oral application to be discharged from the proceedings was procedurally improper, as such applications must be made formally to allow the claimant an opportunity to respond. The court found the oral application to be mischievous and dismissed it, confirming that the orders issued on May 19, 2022—requiring the respondents to file their response to the memorandum of claim and the claimant to reply—remain in force. The court emphasized the importance of following proper procedure and ensuring fairness to all parties, in line with the overriding objectives of the Civil Procedure Act and constitutional principles of access to justice and avoidance of undue...

Court Disposition

Oral application by respondents to be discharged from proceedings dismissed; previous orders requiring parties to file responses and proceed to hearing confirmed.

Orders

  • The oral application by the respondents to be struck from the proceedings and discharged is dismissed.
  • The orders issued on May 19, 2022 requiring the respondents to file their response to the memorandum of claim and the claimant to reply remain in force.