[2019] KEELRC 1696 (KLR)
The court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the claimant's suit because the claimant had already been compensated under the Work Injury Benefits Act. The Act provides a specific appellate mechanism for dissatisfied parties, which the claimant failed to utilize within the prescribed time. The court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELRC 1696 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Stephen Maina Wanjiru; Respondent: Mudecon Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 782 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- claim dismissed
- Judges
- MSA Makhandia
- Legal Topics
- Work Injury Benefits, Jurisdiction, Res Judicata, Statutory Compensation
- 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
Stephen Maina Wanjiru
Claimant
Mudecon Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Employment and Labour Relations Court has jurisdiction to hear a claim for workplace injury after compensation has been processed and paid under the Work Injury Benefits Act.
- 2 Whether the doctrine of res judicata applies to bar the claimant from pursuing further claims for the same workplace injury.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the claimant's suit because the claimant had already been compensated under the Work Injury Benefits Act. The Act provides a specific appellate mechanism for dissatisfied parties, which the claimant failed to utilize within the prescribed time. The court further held that allowing the claimant to pursue additional damages in court after statutory compensation would amount to an abuse of process and violate the principle of finality in litigation. The suit was therefore dismissed as incompetent and an abuse of the court process.
Court Disposition
claim dismissed
Orders
- The cause is dismissed for want of jurisdiction and as an abuse of court process.
- There is no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 782 OF 2017
STEPHEN MAINA WANJIRU.........................................CLAIMANT
v
MUDECON LIMITED.................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The Claimant instituted legal proceedings against the Respondent on 27 April 2017 alleging that the Respondent was liable in statutory negligence as a result of an injury in the work place on 17 March 2016.
2. On 12 October 2017, the Respondent filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection in the following terms
TAKE NOTICE that the Respondent shall raise a preliminary objection at the earliest hearing of this matter on the basis that this Court lacks jurisdiction to hear this matter in view of the Provisions of sections 51 and 52 of the Work Injury Benefits Act Cap 236 Laws of Kenya.
3. On 5 February 2019, the Court directed that the objection be taken on 20 February 2019.
4. The Respondent filed submissions in support of the objection on 18 February 2019 while the Claimant filed his submissions on 18 March 2019.
5. The Court has considered the objection and the submissions.
6. There is material on record to show that the Claimant’s compensation under the Work Injury Benefits Act was processed and paid.
7. In terms of section 51 and 52 of the Work Injury Benefits Act, if the Claimant was dissatisfied, he should have initially preferred an Appeal within 60 days, before approaching this Court.
8. The Respondent also raised res judicata and in his response, the Claimant urged that res judicata did not arise because he had a common law cause of action separate from the application of the Work Injury Benefits Act.
9. In the view of the Court, the Claimant having gone through the process under the Act, and having received compensation cannot approach this Court again seeking general and special damages for the same injuries sustained in the workplace.
10. This Cause is not only incompetent, but an abuse of the Court process. It is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Delivered, dated and signed in Nairobi on this 29th day of March 2019.
Radido Stephen
Judge
Appearances
For Claimant Ms. Osore instructed by Kaburu Miriti & Co. Advocates
For Respondent Ms. Kawira instructed by Gladys Michuki & Associates, Advocates
Court Assistant Lindsey