[2015] KEELRC 1609 (KLR)

[2015] KEELRC 1609 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant was properly served with all relevant applications and hearing notices, as evidenced by multiple affidavits of service. The applicant did not seek to cross-examine the process server or otherwise challenge the evidence of service. The court further held that the application to set...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEELRC 1609 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union; Applicant: Johnson Wando Thuo; Respondent: Kenya Tea Growers Association; Respondent: Ngorongo Tea Factory Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 45 of 2002
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside/review/vary Previous Orders
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the 2nd claimant/respondent
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Setting Aside Orders, Natural Justice, Delay in Filing, Joinder of Parties
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Service of Process Setting Aside Orders Natural Justice Delay in Filing Joinder of Parties

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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union

Applicant

Johnson Wando Thuo

Applicant

Kenya Tea Growers Association

Respondent

Ngorongo Tea Factory Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside/review/vary Previous Orders

  1. 1 Whether the orders made on 26th April 2013 and 2nd April 2014 should be set aside, reviewed, varied or discharged due to alleged fraud, misrepresentation, or lack of service.
  2. 2 Whether there was inordinate delay in bringing the application to set aside the orders.
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd Respondent was properly served with the relevant applications and hearing notices.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was properly served with all relevant applications and hearing notices, as evidenced by multiple affidavits of service. The applicant did not seek to cross-examine the process server or otherwise challenge the evidence of service. The court further held that the application to set aside or review the orders was brought after an inordinate and unexplained delay of over one to two years. The orders in question were not made ex parte, as the applicant had legal representation at the relevant hearings. The court concluded that there was no fraud or misrepresentation in obtaining the orders, and that the principles of natural justice were observed....

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the 2nd claimant/respondent

Orders

  • The application dated 9th February 2015 is dismissed with costs to the 2nd Claimant/Respondent.