[2021] KEELRC 710 (KLR)
The Court found that the investigative report in question was a critical document forming the basis of actions by the 2nd Respondent and, to some extent, the 1st Respondent and the Claimant. However, the report as filed was incomplete, lacking referenced annexures necessary for a full understanding of the facts. To...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELRC 710 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Professor Mwangi S. Kimenyi; Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General; Respondent: Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (KIPPRA); Applicant: Irene Wangui Kimenyi; Applicant: Francis Wesley Kimenyi
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1716 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Interlocutory Objection Ruling
- Outcome
- Objection upheld in part; 2nd Respondent granted leave to file supplementary bundle.
- Judges
- AN Makau
- Legal Topics
- Admissibility of Evidence, Documentary Evidence, Procedural Fairness
- 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
Professor Mwangi S. Kimenyi
Claimant
The Hon. Attorney General
Respondent
Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (KIPPRA)
Respondent
Irene Wangui Kimenyi
Applicant
Francis Wesley Kimenyi
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Interlocutory Objection Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the incomplete investigative report annexed by the 2nd Respondent is admissible as evidence in its current form.
- 2 Whether the Court should disallow production of pages 52-119 of the 2nd Respondent's bundle for want of completeness.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that the investigative report in question was a critical document forming the basis of actions by the 2nd Respondent and, to some extent, the 1st Respondent and the Claimant. However, the report as filed was incomplete, lacking referenced annexures necessary for a full understanding of the facts. To ensure procedural fairness and that the Court is seized of all pertinent facts, the Court exercised its discretion to grant the 2nd Respondent 14 days to file a Supplementary Bundle containing the missing annexures. The hearing would proceed thereafter, and the 2nd Respondent's witness was stood down to allow for this filing. The Court thus balanced the need for completeness of...
Court Disposition
Objection upheld in part; 2nd Respondent granted leave to file supplementary bundle.
Orders
- 2nd Respondent to file a Supplementary Bundle attaching pages 52-119 plus the annexures referenced in the report within 14 days.
- 2nd Respondent's witness stood down pending filing of the Supplementary Bundle.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT & LABOUR RELATIONS
COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 1716 OF 2014
PROFESSOR MWANGI S. KIMENYI................................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL........................................1ST RESPONDENT
KENYA INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY
RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS (KIPPRA)...............................2ND RESPONDENT
AND
1. IRENE WANGUI KIMENYI
2. FRANCIS WESLEY KIMENYI....................................................APPLICANTS
RULING
1. There is Objection taken as to the propriety of evidence adduced by way of an annexure in the 2nd Respondent’s Bundle. Mr. C.N Kihara objects strenuously to the document asserting it is incomplete and that it makes reference to documents not attached to the said report. He asserts the report is in respect of an investigation which he had sought to get without success. He says his objection is that the document is not properly laid before Court and proceedings at the High Court in the Judicial Review as well as the Court of Appeal hovered around the issues said to be in the report and that the report ought to be complete. He asserts the Court should disallow the production of pages 52-119 of the Respondent’s Bundle for want of completeness.
3. Miss Nyaga for the 2nd Respondent is opposed. She asserts that the report is authored in response to the request by the Ministry’s Permanent Secretary who sits on the Board of the 2nd Respondent and that he sought the investigation by the Inspector General of State Corporations due to the irregularities and suspicion of fraud at the 2nd Respondent. She asserts the reason the report was sought is one the Court will be able to on retiring to write the judgement be able to weigh and determine the probative value of the document adduced. The 2nd Respondent thus urges the objection to be disallowed and the matter proceeds.
4. Mr. Kihara in a brief response asserts the 2nd Respondent has nit-picked and pruned the report and given the Court an incomplete report. He asserts the report so incomplete is not one the Claimant had sight of until it was filed despite asking for it repeatedly. He asserts the report was subject of litigation before the High Court and the Court of Appeal in the Judicial Review proceedings. He submits the Court should disallow production of the document.
5. Court having considered the objection raised and having perused annexures at pages 52-119 of the 2nd Respondent’s bundle is of the view that a set which would include the annexures referenced in the report would suffice as to allow the Court to be seized of all the facts pertinent since the report is the basis of the actions by the 2nd Respondent and to an extent the 1st Respondent and the Claimant. As it is a critical document, I will grant the 2nd Respondent 14 days to file a Supplementary Bundle to attach pages 52-119 plus the annexures referenced in the report. The hearing will proceed thereafter and the 2nd Respondent’s witness is therefore stood down to allow the filing as stated above. The Court will give a hearing date convenient to the Parties immediately after reading this Ruling
It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021
NZIOKI WA MAKAU
JUDGE