[2025] KEELRC 1409 (KLR)
The court found that the Claimant had failed to take any steps to prosecute her application dated 17th January 2023 after the initial directions were given in January 2023. The Claimant did not respond to the Respondent's application for dismissal nor provide any explanation for the delay. The court held that the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEELRC 1409 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Mary Minayo; Respondent: Friends Church (Quakers)
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 921 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- Claimant's application dated 17th January 2023 dismissed for want of prosecution. Each party to bear their own costs.
- Judges
- L Ndolo
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Non Attendance, Case Management, Costs Orders
- 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
Mary Minayo
Applicant
Friends Church (Quakers)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Claimant's application dated 17th January 2023 should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
- 2 Whether the Claimant demonstrated any reasonable cause for the delay in prosecuting her application.
- 3 Who should bear the costs of the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Claimant had failed to take any steps to prosecute her application dated 17th January 2023 after the initial directions were given in January 2023. The Claimant did not respond to the Respondent's application for dismissal nor provide any explanation for the delay. The court held that the onus to prosecute the application rested with the Claimant, and her inaction indicated a lack of interest in pursuing the matter. Applying Rule 43 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, the court concluded that there was no reasonable cause shown for the delay, and therefore, the Respondent's application for dismissal for want of prosecution was merited....
Court Disposition
Claimant's application dated 17th January 2023 dismissed for want of prosecution. Each party to bear their own costs.
Orders
- The Respondent's application dated 13th December 2024 is allowed.
- The Claimant's application dated 17th January 2023 is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
Minayo v Friends Church (Quakers) (Cause 921 of 2017) [2025] KEELRC 1409 (KLR) (15 May 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEELRC 1409 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Cause 921 of 2017
L Ndolo, J
May 15, 2025
Between
Mary Minayo
Claimant
and
Friends Church (Quakers)
Respondent
Ruling
1. This ruling determines the Notice of Motion dated 13th December 2024, by which the Respondent seeks dismissal of the Claimant’s application dated 17th January 2023, for want of prosecution.
2. The Respondent’s Motion is supported by an affidavit sworn by Pastor Moses Adika and is based on the following grounds:a.That the Claimant filed her Notice of Motion dated 17th January 2023 on 18th January 2023 and served the Respondent on 19th January 2023;b.That the Respondent filed its Grounds of Opposition on 15th February 2023 and served the Claimant on the same day;c.That thereafter, the Respondent filed a replying affidavit dated 21st March 2023;d.That since 21st March 2023, the Claimant has not fixed her Notice of Motion for hearing;e.That the onus to set down the Notice of Motion for hearing rests solely on the Claimant;f.That the Claimant’s failure has led to non-prosecution of the Motion, to the Respondent’s prejudice, as the taxation of its Bill of Costs dated 22nd August 2022 has been unduly delayed.
3. Despite due service, the Claimant did not respond to the Respondent’s application.
4. Rule 43 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules sets out the following procedure for dismissal of suits for want of prosecution:43. (1)In any suit in which no application has been made in accordance with rule 31 or no action has been taken by either party within one year from the date of its filing, the Court may give notice in writing to the parties to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed and, if no reasonable cause is shown to its satisfaction, may dismiss the suit.(2)If reasonable cause is given to the satisfaction of the Court, it may make such orders as it thinks fit to obtain the expeditious hearing and determination of the suit.(3)Any party to the suit may apply for dismissal as provided in sub- rule (1).(4)The Court may dismiss the suit for non-compliance with any direction given under this rule or rule 31.
5. According to the court record, the Claimant’s claim was dismissed for non- attendance and want of prosecution on 10th May 2022.
6. The Claimant subsequently moved the Court by way of Notice of Motion dated 17th January 2023. This Motion was placed before Mbaru J on 18th January 2023, when directions on hearing and disposal were issued.
7. Thereafter, there was no action by the Claimant, prompting the Respondent to file the present application. Additionally, the Claimant chose not to respond to the Respondent’s application.
8. In the circumstances, it would appear that the Claimant has lost interest in pursuing this matter any further.
9. The Respondent’s application dated 13th December 2024 is therefore allowed, with the consequence that the Claimant’s application dated 17th January 2023 is dismissed with an order that each party will bear their own costs.
10. It is so ordered.
DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 15THDAY OF MAY 2025LINNET NDOLOJUDGEAppearance:No appearance for the ClaimantMr. Aswani for the Respondent