[2017] KEELRC 1472 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 1472 (KLR)

The court found that neither the claimants nor the respondents took any steps to progress the matter or attend court as directed. There was no evidence that the respondents were served with the notice of summons and memorandum of claim. The claimants demonstrated a lack of interest in prosecuting the cause, whose...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 1472 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Perpetua Mponjiwa; Applicant: Bonne Nicholas Barasa; Respondent: Registrar of Trade Unions; Respondent: Rob Abkula; Respondent: Edwin Opicho Wakoli; Respondent: Mark Spinks Okello; Respondent: Ignatius Njeru Kanyamba; Respondent: David Kisindai
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 591 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Dismissal
Outcome
cause dismissed for want of prosecution
Judges
MSA Makhandia
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Service of Process, Union Officials Dispute
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Service of Process Union Officials Dispute

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

Perpetua Mponjiwa

Applicant

Bonne Nicholas Barasa

Applicant

Registrar of Trade Unions

Respondent

Rob Abkula

Respondent

Edwin Opicho Wakoli

Respondent

Mark Spinks Okello

Respondent

Ignatius Njeru Kanyamba

Respondent

David Kisindai

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Dismissal

  1. 1 Whether the cause should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
  2. 2 Whether there was proper service of summons and memorandum of claim upon the respondents.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that neither the claimants nor the respondents took any steps to progress the matter or attend court as directed. There was no evidence that the respondents were served with the notice of summons and memorandum of claim. The claimants demonstrated a lack of interest in prosecuting the cause, whose substance was to interdict the convening of a meeting or causing change of officials of a union. In the absence of evidence of service and in light of the parties' non-attendance, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the cause for want of prosecution, with no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

cause dismissed for want of prosecution

Orders

  • The cause is dismissed for want of prosecution.
  • There is no order as to costs.