[2021] KEELRC 981 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 981 (KLR)

The court found that although the Appellant had written to request certified proceedings and judgment, there was no evidence that a copy of such request was served on the Respondent as required by law. The absence of this service constituted a material departure from the legal requirements for prosecuting an appeal....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 981 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Ruiru Feeds Limited; Respondent: Samuel Njuguna Mbugua
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Appeal 14 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
appeal struck out with costs to the respondent
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Appeal Dismissal, Delay in Prosecution, Record of Appeal, Terminal Dues
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Appeal Dismissal Delay in Prosecution Record of Appeal Terminal Dues

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ruiru Feeds Limited

Appellant

Samuel Njuguna Mbugua

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for inordinate delay in filing the record of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant demonstrated sufficient cause for the delay in prosecuting the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant complied with the legal requirements for requesting proceedings and serving the Respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the Appellant had written to request certified proceedings and judgment, there was no evidence that a copy of such request was served on the Respondent as required by law. The absence of this service constituted a material departure from the legal requirements for prosecuting an appeal. Consequently, the Appellant could not benefit from the exclusion of time for delay in obtaining proceedings, and the appeal was rendered moot due to inordinate delay and non-compliance with procedural rules. The appeal was struck out with costs to the Respondent.

Court Disposition

appeal struck out with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The appeal is struck out.
  • Costs awarded to the Respondent.