[2018] KEELRC 2044 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 2044 (KLR)

The court found that there was no sufficient proof on record to support the 2nd petitioner's claim for compensation or damages. The only evidence before the court was the 2nd petitioner's affidavit, which referenced a judgment and decree that were not available in the file or annexed to the affidavit. There were no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 2044 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kisumu County Assembly Service Board; Applicant: Anne Atieno Adul; Respondent: County Assembly of Kisumu; Respondent: County Executive of Kisumu; Respondent: Eliud Owen Ojuok; Respondent: Nicholas Steven Okola; Respondent: Hon. Gabriel Ochieng; Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 297 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Petition / Ruling on Assessment of Compensation
Outcome
Application for assessment of compensation and damages dismissed for lack of proof.
Judges
DO Ogal, MN Nduma
Legal Topics
Compensation Assessment, Damages, Constitutional Rights Violation
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Compensation Assessment Damages Constitutional Rights Violation

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kisumu County Assembly Service Board

Applicant

Anne Atieno Adul

Applicant

County Assembly of Kisumu

Respondent

County Executive of Kisumu

Respondent

Eliud Owen Ojuok

Respondent

Nicholas Steven Okola

Respondent

Hon. Gabriel Ochieng

Respondent

The Hon. Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition / Ruling on Assessment of Compensation

  1. 1 Whether the 2nd petitioner is entitled to compensation for violation of rights as previously ordered by the court.
  2. 2 Whether general and exemplary/punitive damages should be awarded to the 2nd petitioner.
  3. 3 Whether there is sufficient proof on record to assess and award compensation or damages.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no sufficient proof on record to support the 2nd petitioner's claim for compensation or damages. The only evidence before the court was the 2nd petitioner's affidavit, which referenced a judgment and decree that were not available in the file or annexed to the affidavit. There were no pleadings or replying affidavits from the respondents, and the court had not heard the substantive case. Without the judgment, decree, or pleadings to confirm what was awarded or pleaded, the court could not assess or award compensation or damages. Consequently, the court declined to make any orders for compensation or damages in favour of the 2nd petitioner.

Court Disposition

Application for assessment of compensation and damages dismissed for lack of proof.

Orders

  • No orders for compensation or damages are made in favour of the 2nd petitioner.