[2021] KEELRC 1249 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 1249 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant had not taken any action to prosecute her claim since 2018 and had failed to respond to the respondent's motion for dismissal, despite being duly served. The court concluded that the claimant was no longer interested in pursuing the claim. Applying Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 1249 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Mwanaisha Kitauro; Respondent: Kwale International Sugar Company Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 376 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Motion to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
claim dismissed for want of prosecution
Judges
L Ndolo
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Delay in Prosecution, Terminal Dues
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unlawful Termination Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Delay in Prosecution Terminal Dues

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mwanaisha Kitauro

Claimant

Kwale International Sugar Company Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Motion to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to inordinate delay.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant demonstrated any cause for the delay in prosecuting the claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant had not taken any action to prosecute her claim since 2018 and had failed to respond to the respondent's motion for dismissal, despite being duly served. The court concluded that the claimant was no longer interested in pursuing the claim. Applying Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution, as no cause for the delay was shown and the respondent had demonstrated prejudice due to the prolonged inaction.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed for want of prosecution

Orders

  • The claimant's suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
  • Each party will bear their own costs.