[2023] KEELRC 3405 (KLR)
The court found that there was a clear typographical error in the judgment delivered on 27th July 2023 regarding the amount awarded for gratuity. Paragraph 38 correctly stated the amount as KShs. 81,090.475, while paragraph 40(c) erroneously stated KShs. 81,090,475. The court, acting under section 99 of the Civil...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELRC 3405 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Naomi Wanjiku Muriithi; Respondent: County Government Of Kiambu; Respondent: Kiambu County Public Service Board
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause E208 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Correction of Judgment Under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act
- Outcome
- Judgment corrected to rectify typographical error in gratuity award.
- Judges
- K Ocharo
- Legal Topics
- Judgment Correction, Typographical Error, Gratuity Award, Civil Procedure Act Section 99
- 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
Naomi Wanjiku Muriithi
Applicant
County Government Of Kiambu
Respondent
Kiambu County Public Service Board
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Correction of Judgment Under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court's judgment contained a typographical error in the amount awarded for gratuity.
- 2 Whether the court should correct the judgment under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was a clear typographical error in the judgment delivered on 27th July 2023 regarding the amount awarded for gratuity. Paragraph 38 correctly stated the amount as KShs. 81,090.475, while paragraph 40(c) erroneously stated KShs. 81,090,475. The court, acting under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act, determined that it had the authority to correct such clerical or arithmetical mistakes at any time. The correction was necessary to ensure the judgment accurately reflected the court's intention and to prevent any injustice arising from the error. The court accordingly ordered that paragraph 40(c) be amended to read KShs. 81,090.475, aligning it with paragraph 38.
Court Disposition
Judgment corrected to rectify typographical error in gratuity award.
Orders
- Paragraph 40(c) of the judgment is corrected to read KShs. 81,090.475 to align with paragraph 38.
- A signed copy of the corrected judgment will be availed to each party upon payment of court fees.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Muriithi v County Government of Kiambu & another (Cause E208 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 3405 (KLR) (19 December 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELRC 3405 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Cause E208 of 2022
K Ocharo, J
December 19, 2023
Between
Naomi Wanjiku Muriithi
Claimant
and
County Government Of Kiambu
1st Respondent
Kiambu County Public Service Board
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. The court has noted the letter dated 06. 12. 2023 by Counsel for the Claimant. True as captured in the letter, the figure that the court granted for gratuity under paragraph 38, of the judgment namely 81,090. 475 (eighty one thousand and ninety shillings, fourty seven cents) does not marry with the figure captured in the reliefs section paragraph 40 (c) as KShs.81,090,475 (eighty one million, ninety thousand and four seventy five shillings).
2. There is a typographical error, in the latter amount. It needs to be corrected.
3. Pursuant to section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act, this court’s judgment of 27th July 2023 is hereby corrected. Paragraph 40 (c) shall read KShs. 81,090. 475 to align with paragraph 38 thereof.
4. Orders accordingly.
READ, DELIVERED AND SIGNED THIS 19thDAY OF DECEMBER, 2023. ......................OCHARO, KEBIRAJUDGEIn the presence of:Mr. Wamalwa for the ClaimantOrderIn view of the declaration of measures restricting Court operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic and in light of the directions issued by His Lordship, the Chief Justice on 15th March 2020 and subsequent directions of 21st April 2020 that judgments and rulings shall be delivered through video conferencing or via email. They have waived compliance with Order 21 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which requires that all judgments and rulings be pronounced in open Court. In permitting this course, this Court has been guided by Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution which requires the Court to eschew undue technicalities in delivering justice, the right of access to justice guaranteed to every person under Article 48 of the Constitution and the provisions of Section 1B of the Procedure Act (Chapter 21 of the Laws of Kenya) which impose on this Court the duty of the Court, inter alia, to use suitable technology to enhance the overriding objective which is to facilitate just, expeditious, proportionate and affordable resolution of civil disputes.A signed copy will be availed to each party upon payment of Court fees................................OCHARO KEBIRAJUDGE