[2021] KEELRC 25 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 25 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant failed to take any steps to prosecute the suit from December 2019 until the instant application. Notices to attend court were issued to the claimant using the address on record, and the claimant did not attend despite such service. The court held that even if the claimant disputed...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 25 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Shipping Cleaning and Warehouses Workers Union; Respondent: Vegpro (K) Limited; Respondent: Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 983 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Service of Court Notices, Reinstatement of Suit, Court Procedure, Covid19 Impact on Court Operations
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Service of Court Notices Reinstatement of Suit Court Procedure Covid19 Impact on Court Operations

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Shipping Cleaning and Warehouses Workers Union

Applicant

Vegpro (K) Limited

Respondent

Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit

  1. 1 Whether the orders dismissing the suit for want of prosecution should be set aside and the suit reinstated.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was properly served with notice to show cause before dismissal.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant demonstrated good cause for failure to prosecute the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant failed to take any steps to prosecute the suit from December 2019 until the instant application. Notices to attend court were issued to the claimant using the address on record, and the claimant did not attend despite such service. The court held that even if the claimant disputed some email addresses, the address used by the court registry was consistent with the claimant's own correspondence. The court further found that the claimant did not demonstrate good cause for the failure to prosecute the suit, and the explanation regarding the COVID-19 pandemic was not sufficient, as court operations had resumed in hybrid form. The court concluded that the...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application dated 22nd October, 2021 is dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the 1st respondent.