[2018] KEELRC 2288 (KLR)
The court found that the applicants' previous application dated 9th January 2015 had been heard on merit and dismissed by Nduma J after hearing both parties. Therefore, the assertion that the applicants were condemned unheard was factually incorrect. As the matter had already been determined, the court was functus...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELRC 2288 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kinuthia Estone Maina; Applicant: Edward Mbithi; Applicant: Edward Kasakhala (suing on behalf of themselves and 163 others being ex-employees of Coffee Board of Kenya); Respondent: Coffee Board of Kenya
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 218 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- L Ndolo, DO Ogal
- Legal Topics
- Redundancy Benefits, Unpaid Terminal Dues, Right to Be Heard, Functus Officio, Court Jurisdiction
- 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
Kinuthia Estone Maina
Applicant
Edward Mbithi
Applicant
Edward Kasakhala (suing on behalf of themselves and 163 others being ex-employees of Coffee Board of Kenya)
Applicant
Coffee Board of Kenya
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the dismissal of the applicants' previous application was done without hearing them, thus violating their right to be heard.
- 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to reinstate the dismissed application and suit, or is functus officio.
- 3 Whether the application to reinstate constitutes an abuse of court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants' previous application dated 9th January 2015 had been heard on merit and dismissed by Nduma J after hearing both parties. Therefore, the assertion that the applicants were condemned unheard was factually incorrect. As the matter had already been determined, the court was functus officio and lacked jurisdiction to revisit or reinstate the dismissed application or suit. The grounds advanced by the applicants did not reflect the actual procedural history, and the application to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the suit was unmeritorious. The application was accordingly dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 12th November 2015 is dismissed.
- Each party will bear their own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
36 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO 218 OF 2015
[FORMERLY HIGH COURT CIVIL SUIT NO 201 OF 2008]
KINUTHIA ESTONE MAINA...................................CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
EDWARD MBITHI....................................................CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
EDWARD KASAKHALA (suing on behalf of themselves and163 othersbeing
ex-employees ofCoffee Board of Kenya)..............CLAIMANTS/APPLICANTS
VERSUS
COFFEE BOARD OF KENYA.....................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This ruling relates to the Claimants’ application brought by Notice of Motion dated 12th November 2015, seeking the following orders:
a) That the Court be pleased to set aside the order made by Nduma J on 10th July 2015, dismissing the application dated 9th January 2015;
b) That the application dated 9th January 2015 be reinstated and heard on merit;
c) That the suit be reinstated and heard on merit.
2. The application, which is supported by an affidavit sworn by Dr. John Khaminwa, SCis based on the following grounds:
a) That an order was made by the Court on 10th July 2015, dismissing the application dated 9th January 2015;
b) That dismissing the application without hearing Counsel for the Applicants amounts to condemning the Applicants unheard;
c) That the subject matter relates to unpaid terminal benefits due to the Applicants arising out of redundancy, which benefits are constitutional rights of the Applicants and are not subject to limitation of time or the principle of res judicata;
d) That the Court has jurisdiction to grant the orders sought.
3. In response to the current application, the Respondent filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection on 7th April 2016, raising the following points:
a) That this Court is functus officio and therefore lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine the application;
b) That the application as filed is an abuse of the court process.
4. I have looked at the ruling delivered by my brother, Nduma J on 10th July 2015 and find that the learned Judge dismissed the Applicant’s application dated 9th January 2015 after hearing the parties on merit. It cannot therefore be said that the Applicants were sent away unheard.
5. The grounds upon which the current application is grounded together with the averments in the supporting affidavit do not reflect the actual situation regarding this matter. The Court therefore finds the application unmeritorious and proceeds to dismiss it.
6. Each party will bear their own costs.
7. Orders accordingly.
DATED AND SIGNED AT NAIROBI THIS 9THDAY OF JANUARY 2018
LINNET NDOLO
JUDGE
DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT NAIROBITHIS 2NDDAY OF FEBRUARY 2018
MAUREEN ONYANGO
JUDGE
Appearance:
Dr. Khaminwa, SC for the Applicants
Ms. Nduta for the Respondent