[2022] KEELRC 1601 (KLR)

[2022] KEELRC 1601 (KLR)

The court held that the Directorate of Criminal Investigation, not being a party to the proceedings, could not be cited as a respondent in the application without leave of the court. The proper procedure would have been for the applicant to seek leave to enjoin the Directorate or to request the court to order the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELRC 1601 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Jacinta Loko Nzomo; Respondent: Kenya Airport Parking Services Ltd & another
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause E257 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
AN Mwaure
Legal Topics
Electronic Evidence, Joinder of Parties, Interlocutory Applications
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Civil Procedure Electronic Evidence Joinder of Parties Interlocutory Applications

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacinta Loko Nzomo

Applicant

Kenya Airport Parking Services Ltd & another

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the Directorate of Criminal Investigation can be cited as a respondent in the ongoing suit without being a party to the proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's request for technical assistance in producing electronic evidence is procedurally proper.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Directorate of Criminal Investigation, not being a party to the proceedings, could not be cited as a respondent in the application without leave of the court. The proper procedure would have been for the applicant to seek leave to enjoin the Directorate or to request the court to order the production of electronic evidence and a certificate under section 106 of the Evidence Act. The application was therefore procedurally defective and amounted to a waste of judicial time. The court dismissed the application with costs, but granted liberty to the applicant to regularise the position if necessary.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs to the applicant.
  • The applicant is at liberty to regularise the position if need be.