[2015] KEELRC 1400 (KLR)

[2015] KEELRC 1400 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had provided a reasonable and credible explanation for the absence of counsel on the day of the ex-parte hearing, namely that the matter was listed before the Deputy Registrar and could not have been simultaneously listed before the presiding judge. The court exercised its...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEELRC 1400 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Silvester Oduor Onyango; Respondent: Joan Packaging & Accessories Ltd
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 492 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Hearing
Outcome
application allowed; ex-parte hearing set aside; case to be heard de novo
Legal Topics
Ex Parte Hearing, Setting Aside Orders, Absence of Counsel, Hearing De Novo
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Ex Parte Hearing Setting Aside Orders Absence of Counsel Hearing De Novo

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Silvester Oduor Onyango

Claimant

Joan Packaging & Accessories Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ex-parte hearing conducted on 14/10/2014 should be set aside due to the absence of counsel for the claimant.
  2. 2 Whether the explanation for counsel's absence on the material day is reasonable and sufficient to warrant setting aside the proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether the case should commence de novo.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had provided a reasonable and credible explanation for the absence of counsel on the day of the ex-parte hearing, namely that the matter was listed before the Deputy Registrar and could not have been simultaneously listed before the presiding judge. The court exercised its discretion to set aside the ex-parte proceedings, holding that justice would be better served by allowing the matter to be heard afresh. The ex-parte hearing of 14/10/2014 was therefore set aside, and the case was ordered to start de novo on a date to be fixed at the Registry.

Court Disposition

application allowed; ex-parte hearing set aside; case to be heard de novo

Orders

  • The ex-parte hearing that took place on 14/10/2014 is set aside.
  • The case shall start de novo on a date to be fixed at the Registry.