[2016] KEELRC 1138 (KLR)
The court found that although the factual basis of the current claim is similar to that in Petition No. 181 of 2012, the issues are distinct. The previous petition addressed the claimant's status as a student and the respondent's accusation regarding misuse of office for enrollment without fee settlement. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEELRC 1138 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Patrick Mbau Karanja; Respondent: Kenyatta University
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1662 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- preliminary objection dismissed; matter to proceed to trial
- Judges
- NJ Abuodha
- Legal Topics
- Res Judicata, Employment Relationship, Preliminary Objection
- 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
Patrick Mbau Karanja
Claimant
Kenyatta University
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the present claim is barred by the doctrine of res judicata due to similarity with Petition No. 181 of 2012.
- 2 Whether the issues in the current claim are distinct from those previously litigated.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the factual basis of the current claim is similar to that in Petition No. 181 of 2012, the issues are distinct. The previous petition addressed the claimant's status as a student and the respondent's accusation regarding misuse of office for enrollment without fee settlement. The present claim, however, concerns the employment relationship between the claimant and the respondent. The doctrine of res judicata does not apply where the issues in dispute are not the same, even if the underlying facts overlap. Therefore, the objection on grounds of res judicata was without merit and was dismissed, allowing the matter to proceed to trial on its merits.
Court Disposition
preliminary objection dismissed; matter to proceed to trial
Orders
- The preliminary objection is dismissed.
- The matter shall proceed to trial on merit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NUMBER 1662 OF 2013
PATRICK MBAU KARANJA…...............................……CLAIMANT
VERSUS
KENYATTA UNIVERSITY.........................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The respondent raised objection the essence of which was that the factual basis and circumstances of the claim are similar to those raised in petition no. 181 of 2012 which was heard and determined by the High Court (Lenaola J). The claim herein is therefore incompetent by reason of res judicata.
2. The Court has considered the objection and submissions by counsel in support thereof and is not persuaded that the present suit is res judicata.
3. It is correct that the facts on which this claim is based are similar to those in petition no 181 of 2012 however the issue in that petition as I see it was a challenge to the respondent’s accusation against the claimant that he had misused his office to enroll for studies without having settled his fees. The proceedings before the High Court therefore concerned the claimant as a student and had nothing to do with his employment relationship with the respondent which is the issue he intends to litigate before this Court.
4. To argue that the matter is res judicata would be akin to saying that a party cannot on similar facts for which he was prosecuted in a criminal trial be sued in a civil claim for recovery of damages. That is not the correct position.
5. The Court therefore finds no merit in the objection and hereby dismissed the same with the result that the matter shall proceed to trial on merit.
6. It is so ordered.
Dated at Nairobi this 13th day of May 2016
Abuodha Jorum Nelson
Judge
Delivered this 13th day of May 2016
In the presence of:-
……………for the Claimant and
……………………for the Respondent.
Abuodha Jorum Nelson
Judge