[2009] KEHC 2093 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 2093 (KLR)

The court, upon hearing all counsel and noting their agreement, exercised its inherent jurisdiction and statutory powers to correct typographical errors in the judgment. The corrections involved amending references to specific sections of the Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007, ensuring the judgment accurately reflects...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 2093 (KLR)
Parties
Petitioner: Law Society of Kenya; Respondent: Attorney-General; Interested Party: Central Organisation of Trade Unions (K)
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Constitutional Petition 185 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Corrigenda Ruling
Outcome
Typographical errors in the judgment corrected as specified.
Judges
JB Ojwang
Legal Topics
Work Injury Benefits, Judgment Correction, Fundamental Rights, Typographical Errors
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Employment and Labour Work Injury Benefits Judgment Correction Fundamental Rights Typographical Errors

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Law Society of Kenya

Petitioner

Attorney-General

Respondent

Central Organisation of Trade Unions (K)

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Corrigenda Ruling

  1. 1 Whether typographical errors in the judgment should be corrected under the Civil Procedure Act and the court's inherent jurisdiction.
  2. 2 Whether the references to specific sections of the Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007 in the judgment were erroneous and require amendment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court, upon hearing all counsel and noting their agreement, exercised its inherent jurisdiction and statutory powers to correct typographical errors in the judgment. The corrections involved amending references to specific sections of the Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007, ensuring the judgment accurately reflects the law. The court found that such corrections are necessary to prevent injustice and to ensure the integrity of the judicial record, as permitted by the Civil Procedure Act.

Court Disposition

Typographical errors in the judgment corrected as specified.

Orders

  • On page 61, reference to s. 7(2) of the Act corrected to s. 7(4) of the Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007.
  • On page 12, reference to s. 7(2) corrected to s. 7(4) of the Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007.