[2022] KEELRC 12728 (KLR)

[2022] KEELRC 12728 (KLR)

The court found that the respondents' application dated 30th December 2020 was a repetition of a preliminary objection previously raised and determined by the court in its ruling of 19th January 2016, which dismissed the objection and ordered the claim to be heard on its merits. The court held that if the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELRC 12728 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Hassan Aden Osman; Respondent: Cabinet Secretary for Defence and Chairperson of Defence Council; Respondent: Hon. Attorney General
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 32 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/application to Strike Out Claim as Time Barred
Outcome
application declined; claim to proceed on merits
Judges
J Rika
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Preliminary Objection, Employment Contracts, Strike Out Applications
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Limitation of Actions Preliminary Objection Employment Contracts Strike Out 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hassan Aden Osman

Applicant

Cabinet Secretary for Defence and Chairperson of Defence Council

Respondent

Hon. Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/application to Strike Out Claim as Time Barred

  1. 1 Whether the claim is time-barred under the Public Authorities Limitations Act and the Employment Act, 2007.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents can re-litigate a preliminary objection previously determined by the court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents' application dated 30th December 2020 was a repetition of a preliminary objection previously raised and determined by the court in its ruling of 19th January 2016, which dismissed the objection and ordered the claim to be heard on its merits. The court held that if the respondents were dissatisfied with that ruling, their recourse was to appeal, not to bring the same objection before a different judge of coordinate jurisdiction. The court reaffirmed the principle that issues already determined by a competent court cannot be re-litigated and that the earlier ruling remains in force. Consequently, the application was declined, and the claim was directed...

Court Disposition

application declined; claim to proceed on merits

Orders

  • The application dated 30th December 2020 is declined.
  • The claim shall be heard on merit.