[2014] KEELRC 155 (KLR)

[2014] KEELRC 155 (KLR)

The court found that it had erred by delivering judgment against parties who had already been substituted out of the suit by a consent order dated 15th March 2010. This procedural oversight brought the matter within the scope of Rule 32 of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules 2010 and Section 16 of the Industrial...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEELRC 155 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Patrick Nyakundi; Applicant: Christopher Ongoto; Respondent: Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT Headquarters); Respondent: Kenya National Union of Teachers (Kisii Branch)
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1902 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Ruling on Review Applications Post Judgment
Outcome
review granted; judgment set aside in part; further evidence to be taken; no order as to costs
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Review of Judgment, Substitution of Parties, Procedural Error
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Review of Judgment Substitution of Parties Procedural Error

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

Patrick Nyakundi

Applicant

Christopher Ongoto

Applicant

Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT Headquarters)

Respondent

Kenya National Union of Teachers (Kisii Branch)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Ruling on Review Applications Post Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the judgment delivered on 10th January 2014 was made in error by failing to consider the substitution of parties as per the consent order of 15th March 2010.
  2. 2 Whether the judgment should be reviewed under Rule 32 of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules 2010 and Section 16 of the Industrial Court Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that it had erred by delivering judgment against parties who had already been substituted out of the suit by a consent order dated 15th March 2010. This procedural oversight brought the matter within the scope of Rule 32 of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules 2010 and Section 16 of the Industrial Court Act, which empower the court to review its own decisions in the interest of justice. The court therefore set aside the judgment to the extent that it affected the substituted parties, directed that evidence not previously adduced by Mr. Christopher Ongoto be taken, and ordered that judgment would be rendered against the correct respondents after such evidence is received....

Court Disposition

review granted; judgment set aside in part; further evidence to be taken; no order as to costs

Orders

  • The judgment of 10th January 2014 is reviewed to the extent that it affected substituted parties.
  • Evidence not previously adduced by Mr. Christopher Ongoto shall be taken.