https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2212

https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2212

The appellant failed to file even the basic components of a Record of Appeal and therefore had not shown a sufficient foundation for the exercise of discretion to set aside the dismissal, extend time, or reinstate the appeal. The court held that invoking Article 50 and Article 159 could not override non-compliance...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEELRC 2212 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Sana Industries Company Limited; Respondent: Dennis Oongo Anyimu
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Appeal E366 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Employment and Labour Relations Court Appeal / Application to Set Aside Dismissal, Enlarge Time, and Reinstate Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
["M Mbarũ"]
Legal Topics
Record of Appeal, Extension of Time, Setting Aside Dismissal Orders, Notice to Show Cause, Access to Justice, Article 159 of the Constitution
Source Language
en
Employment Law Civil Procedure Appellate Procedure Constitutional Law Record of Appeal Extension of Time Setting Aside Dismissal Orders Notice to Show Cause +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sana Industries Company Limited

Appellant

Dennis Oongo Anyimu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment and Labour Relations Court Appeal / Application to Set Aside Dismissal, Enlarge Time, and Reinstate Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the court should set aside and vacate the dismissal orders of 22 May 2026
  2. 2 Whether time should be enlarged to allow filing of a complete Record of Appeal out of time
  3. 3 Whether the court should call for the lower court file and rely on it to determine the appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to file even the basic components of a Record of Appeal and therefore had not shown a sufficient foundation for the exercise of discretion to set aside the dismissal, extend time, or reinstate the appeal. The court held that invoking Article 50 and Article 159 could not override non-compliance with the Court Rules, and that calling for the lower court file would improperly shift the appellant’s burden to the court. The application was therefore without merit.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The application dated 28 May 2026 is dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.