[2016] KEELRC 213 (KLR)
The court held that the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri had jurisdiction to hear the matter, as jurisdiction extends throughout Kenya. The principle that the convenience of the employee should guide the geographical place of trial was affirmed, and since the claimant was currently working in Nyeri and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEELRC 213 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Timothy Samson Ayuo; Respondent: Mount Kenya University
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 196 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Transfer of Suit
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- B Ongaya
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of Employment Court, Transfer of Suit, Convenience of Parties
- 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
Timothy Samson Ayuo
Claimant
Mount Kenya University
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Transfer of Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri has jurisdiction to hear the matter.
- 2 Whether the suit should be transferred to the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi for hearing and disposal.
- 3 Whether convenience to the employee should determine the geographical place of trial.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri had jurisdiction to hear the matter, as jurisdiction extends throughout Kenya. The principle that the convenience of the employee should guide the geographical place of trial was affirmed, and since the claimant was currently working in Nyeri and the respondent had offices there, there was no compelling reason to transfer the suit to Nairobi. The application for transfer was therefore dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application to transfer the suit to Nairobi is dismissed.
- The costs of the application to abide the outcome of the main suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NYERI
CAUSE NO. 196 OF 2016
TIMOTHY SAMSON AYUO...................................... CLAIMANT
VERSUS
MOUNT KENYA UNIVERSITY.............................RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 9th December, 2016)
RULING
The respondent filed on 05. 10. 2016 an application by way of a notice of motion through Okoth & Company Advocates. The application invoked Article 48 of the Constitution, Sections 3 and 29 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, general principles of law and any other enabling powers and provisions and powers of the court. The applicant prayed for orders that:
a. The claim herein be transferred to the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi for hearing and disposal.
b. Costs be provided for.
The application was based on the attached supporting affidavit of Jacob Auma Okoth Advocate and the following grounds:
a. The cause of action arose within Nairobi City where the claimant was employed to work at the respondent’s city campus and the witnesses will be readily available at Nairobi.
b. It is in the interests of justice, reasonable, proportionate, and just that the matter is heard and determined by the court sitting at Nairobi.
The claimant filed grounds of opposition on 01. 11. 2016. The claimant urged that the court had jurisdiction to handle the matter and the jurisdiction spread throughout Kenya per Article 162(2) of the Constitution and section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act. It was urged that the respondent had offices and operated in Nyeri. Further, it was said that the claimant currently worked in Nyeri town at the Dedan Kimathi University and it was convenient to hear the case at Nyeri.
In Kenyatta Maita Mwawashe –Versus- Plan International Kenya, ELRC Cause No. 5 of 2014 at Mombasa, Rika J held that sections 15 and 18 of the Civil Procedure Act were completely irrelevant and this Court traditionally determined the geographical place of trial on the basis of the convenience to the employee. In the present case there is no doubt that the respondent has offices in Nyeri and the claimant will be more convenience in Nyeri. Taking into account that principle that favours the employee and in absence of a compelling reason to transfer the suit to Nairobi, the application will fail.
In conclusion the application filed for the respondent on 05. 10. 2016 is hereby dismissed with orders as follows:
a. The costs of the application to abide the outcome of the main suit.
b. Parties to take directions on the hearing of the suit and fixing the earliest hearing date.
Signed, datedanddeliveredin court atNyerithisFriday, 9th December, 2016.
BYRAM ONGAYA
JUDGE