[2022] KEELRC 13183 (KLR)

[2022] KEELRC 13183 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant died on January 15, 2018, and no application for substitution of the deceased claimant with a legal representative was made within the mandatory one-year period as required by Order 24 Rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court held that the provisions on substitution are...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELRC 13183 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Ronald Kisuza Songole; Respondent: Rural Electrification Authority
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1324 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Claim Due to Abatement
Outcome
claim struck out for abatement; each party to bear own costs
Judges
L Ndolo
Legal Topics
Abatement of Suit, Substitution of Deceased Party, Mandatory Procedural Timelines
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Civil Procedure Abatement of Suit Substitution of Deceased Party Mandatory Procedural Timelines

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Kisuza Songole

Applicant

Rural Electrification Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Claim Due to Abatement

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's suit should be struck out for failure to substitute the deceased claimant within the mandatory one-year period.
  2. 2 Whether the claim has abated by operation of law under Order 24 Rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant died on January 15, 2018, and no application for substitution of the deceased claimant with a legal representative was made within the mandatory one-year period as required by Order 24 Rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court held that the provisions on substitution are mandatory and non-compliance is fatal to the suit. As no sufficient cause was shown for the delay and no application for extension of time was made, the claim abated by operation of law. Consequently, the court struck out the claim for abatement and ordered each party to bear their own costs.

Court Disposition

claim struck out for abatement; each party to bear own costs

Orders

  • The claim is struck out for abatement by operation of law.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.