[2022] KEHC 2782 (KLR)
The High Court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal as the dispute arose from an employer-employee relationship, which falls exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court as established by Articles 162(2) and 165(5) of the Constitution of Kenya....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2782 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Protective Custody Limited; Respondent: Joseph Mumia Ndubi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 99 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal struck out for want of jurisdiction
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of High Court, Employment Relationship, Transfer of Suit, Constitutional Jurisdiction
- 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
Protective Custody Limited
Appellant
Joseph Mumia Ndubi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine employment and labour relations disputes.
- 2 Whether the High Court can transfer a suit over which it lacks jurisdiction to the appropriate court.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal as the dispute arose from an employer-employee relationship, which falls exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court as established by Articles 162(2) and 165(5) of the Constitution of Kenya. Furthermore, the court held that it could not transfer the matter to the appropriate court because it had no jurisdiction over the subject matter, as affirmed by binding Court of Appeal decisions. Consequently, the appeal was found to be incompetent and was struck out with costs awarded to the respondent.
Court Disposition
appeal struck out for want of jurisdiction
Orders
- The appeal is struck out as incompetent.
- The respondent shall have the costs of the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 99 OF 2019
PROTECTIVE CUSTODY LIMITED....................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
JOSEPH MUMIA NDUBI........................................................RESPONDENT
(An appeal arising from the ruling and order of the Hon. B Ochieng, Chief Magistrate (Ag PM), in Kakamega CMCCC No. 220 of 2018 of 25th September 2019)
JUDGMENT
1. According to the plaint filed in the primary suit, dated 30h April 2018, the appellant herein was the employer of the respondent. That would mean that there was an employer-employee relationship between them, and the dispute before the court related to labour relations. The High Court has no jurisdiction, since 2010, to handle disputes that turn on employment and labour relations, by dint of Articles 162(2) and 165(5) of the Constitution of Kenya. That would mean that I have no jurisdiction to handle the appeal herein.
2. By dint of the decisions of the Court of Appeal in Phoenix of EA Assurance Company Limited vs. SM Thiga t/a Newspaper Service [2019] eKLR(Karanja, Gatembu & Sichale JJA)and Equity Bank Limited vs. Bruce Mutie Mutuku t/a Diani Tour Travel [2016] eKLR (Makhandia, Ouko & M’Inoti JJA), where the High Court has no jurisdction over a matter before it, it would have no jurisdiction, under sections 17 and 18 of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21, Laws of Kenya, to transfer the suit, in respect of which it has no jurisdiction, to the court with jurisdiction.
3. The appeal before me was filed at the wrong forum, before a court which has no jurisdiction to entertain it. It is, therefore, incompetent. It is accordingly struck out. The respondent shall have the costs.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT KAKAMEGA THIS 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE
Mr. Erick Zalo, Court Assistant.
Mr. Khayumbi, instructed by Messrs. JJ Khayumbi & Co.,Advocates, for the appellant
Ms. Shibanda, instructed by VA Shibanda & Co., Advocates, for the respondent.