[2014] KEELRC 1466 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was properly served with the relevant court documents, as evidenced by the stamped copy of the order on the court file and the affidavit of service. The applicant did not deny that their office received the documents, only contesting the sufficiency of the affidavit and the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEELRC 1466 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers; Respondent: MEK Sacco Society Ltd
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 156 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Ruling
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- HS Wasilwa
- Legal Topics
- Service of Process, Setting Aside Ex Parte Orders, Affidavit of Service
- 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
Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers
Applicant
MEK Sacco Society Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant was properly served with the application or summons to enter appearance.
- 2 Whether the affidavit of service was sufficient to prove service on the applicant.
- 3 Whether failure to serve a director or officer of the corporation invalidated the service.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was properly served with the relevant court documents, as evidenced by the stamped copy of the order on the court file and the affidavit of service. The applicant did not deny that their office received the documents, only contesting the sufficiency of the affidavit and the identification of the person served. The court held that the issue of service was clear and that the application to set aside the ruling on the ground of non-service was not truthful and lacked merit. Accordingly, the application was rejected.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application to set aside the ruling delivered on 30.7.2014 is rejected.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU
CAUSE NO. 156 OF 2014
(BEFORE HON. JUSTICE HELLEN S. WASILWA ON 3RD DECEMBER, 2014)
KENYA UNION OF COMMERCIAL, FOOD AND
ALLIED WORKERS .......................................... CLAIMANTS
-VERSUS-
MEK SACCO SOCIETY LTD ..........................RESPODENTS
R U L I N G
The application in court is one dated 11. 8.2014. The applicant seeks orders that this court sets aside it's ruling delivered on 30. 7.2014. The application is brought through chamber summons dated 14. 8.2014 brought under S. 3 (1)(2) of Judicature Act (Cap 8) Laws of Kenya, Sections 3, 3A, 1A, 1B of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21) Laws of Kenya and all other enabling provisions of law. The application is supported by the affidavit of Margaret Awuor Odhiambo deponed to on 14. 8.2014.
The applicant contends that they were not served with the application or summons to enter appearance and therefore this court was misled by respondents when they filed an affidavit of service alleging service dated 23. 7.2014. They aver that under Order 5 rule 3(a) the person to be served is a director or officer of the corporation yet none were served in this case. They also aver that the affidavit of service does not state what the bundle of documents that were served were nor who identified the person served. They cited Transworld Radio Limited V Clive Wabule Wafukho pg 5 and asked court to allow the application.
The respondents opposed this application. They contend that the applicants were served and that is why they came on record. They want the court to allow them to continue and execute their judgment.
I have considered the averments of both parties. I notice that the claimant first came to court on 3. 7.2014 ex parte seeking orders under certificate of urgency. They were granted ex parte orders and ordered to serve the respondents and matter set for inter partes hearing on 24. 7.2014.
On 24. 7.2014, they appeared in court and the respondents were absent. They had filed an affidavit of service sworn by one Yourniter O. Pacho who stated in her affidavit that she served secretary of MEK Sacco on 10th July 2014 with court order who acknowledged service by stamping the copy. The stamped copy was on the court file and behind were listed documents served.
The applicants have not denied that the stamp on the order does not belong to them. They have only contested the fact that the affidavit of service is not elaborate as to how the person served was identified nor whether he was a director of the applicants.
The issue of service upon the applicants is clear – that they were served and they have not denied that their office received the stamped copy of the order and documents. I therefore find that the application to set aside the ruling on account of not being served is not truthful. It lacks merit and the application is rejected.
HELLEN S. WASILWA
JUDGE
3/12/2014
Appearances:-
Nyawiri h/b Atela for claimants present
Nyawiri for respondents present
CC. Wamache