[2023] KEELRC 80 (KLR)

[2023] KEELRC 80 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had filed a notice of withdrawal of the application before the ruling could be delivered. In accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules, the court marked the application as withdrawn. The court further ordered that costs be awarded to the respondents, as they had been put to the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELRC 80 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Samuel Otieno Ochieng; Respondent: Migori County Secretary; Respondent: Governor, Migori County; Respondent: County Public Service Board, Migori
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application E065 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Withdrawal of Application
Outcome
Application marked as withdrawn. Costs awarded to the respondents.
Judges
S Radido
Legal Topics
Termination of Employment, Public Service Employment, Judicial Review, Jurisdiction, Interlocutory Injunctions
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Termination of Employment Public Service Employment Judicial Review Jurisdiction Interlocutory Injunctions

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel Otieno Ochieng

Applicant

Migori County Secretary

Respondent

Governor, Migori County

Respondent

County Public Service Board, Migori

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Withdrawal of Application

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant interim orders restraining the respondents from terminating the applicant's employment or removing him from the payroll pending determination of his complaint before the Public Service Commission.
  2. 2 Whether the application should be marked as withdrawn following the applicant's notice of withdrawal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had filed a notice of withdrawal of the application before the ruling could be delivered. In accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules, the court marked the application as withdrawn. The court further ordered that costs be awarded to the respondents, as they had been put to the expense of responding to the application. The withdrawal rendered the substantive issues in the application moot, and no further orders were necessary.

Court Disposition

Application marked as withdrawn. Costs awarded to the respondents.

Orders

  • The application dated 9 December 2022 is marked as withdrawn.
  • Costs to the respondents.