[2023] KEELRC 2355 (KLR)

[2023] KEELRC 2355 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent/applicant failed to demonstrate any prejudice that would be suffered if the stay of proceedings was not granted. The court emphasized that the suit had merely been reinstated and was yet to be heard, and that the respondent would have the opportunity to defend itself at trial. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELRC 2355 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Gabriel Muraya Ngunjiri; Respondent: Middle East Bank Kenya Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 97 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
AK Nzei
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Reinstatement of Suit, Court Discretion, Appeal Process
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Civil Procedure Stay of Proceedings Reinstatement of Suit Court Discretion Appeal Process

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gabriel Muraya Ngunjiri

Applicant

Middle East Bank Kenya Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant a stay of proceedings pending the hearing and determination of the respondent's appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent demonstrated sufficient cause or prejudice to warrant a stay of proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction to set aside its own dismissal order made for non-attendance.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent/applicant failed to demonstrate any prejudice that would be suffered if the stay of proceedings was not granted. The court emphasized that the suit had merely been reinstated and was yet to be heard, and that the respondent would have the opportunity to defend itself at trial. The court further held that the relevant rules did not provide for a stay of proceedings in the circumstances, as no decree or executable order existed. The court exercised its discretion under Section 12(3)(viii) of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act to reinstate the suit and found no merit in the application for stay. Consequently, the application was dismissed with...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 16th February 2022 is dismissed with costs.