[2017] KEELRC 1529 (KLR)
The court found that the claimant had not taken any steps to prosecute the cause since it was last before the court in October 2012. There was no evidence that the memorandum of claim had been served upon the respondents. Despite the issuance of hearing notices by the Deputy Registrar and acknowledgment of service...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELRC 1529 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Tom Ekisa Ololi; Respondent: Hon. Attorney General; Respondent: Commissioner of Police; Respondent: Ministry of Internal Security and Provincial Administration
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 876 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- cause dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- MSA Makhandia
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Service of Process, Failure to Prosecute
- 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
Tom Ekisa Ololi
Claimant
Hon. Attorney General
Respondent
Commissioner of Police
Respondent
Ministry of Internal Security and Provincial Administration
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant took steps to prosecute the cause after it was stood over generally.
- 2 Whether there was evidence of service of the Memorandum of Claim upon the respondents.
- 3 Whether the cause should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimant had not taken any steps to prosecute the cause since it was last before the court in October 2012. There was no evidence that the memorandum of claim had been served upon the respondents. Despite the issuance of hearing notices by the Deputy Registrar and acknowledgment of service by the claimant's advocate, neither party appeared at the scheduled hearing. The absence of service of summons and the failure of the parties to appear or take action led the court to conclude that the cause should be dismissed for want of prosecution. The court exercised its discretion to dismiss the matter, noting the lack of diligence by the claimant and the absence of any...
Court Disposition
cause dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The cause is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- There is no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 876 OF 2012
TOM EKISA OLOLI …………………………………………..CLAIMANT
VERSUS
HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL………………………..1ST RESPONDENT
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE……………………...2ND RESPONDENT
MINISTRY OF INTERNAL SECURITY
AND PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION……….....…3RD RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The last time the Cause was before Court was on 19th October 2012 when Rika J stood it over generally, in the absence of the parties.
2. Since then, there is nothing on record to show that the Claimant has taken steps to progress the Cause for hearing. There is even no evidence that the Memorandum of Claim was served upon the Respondents.
3. On 8th March 2017, the Deputy Registrar issued hearing notices to the parties. The Claimant’s advocate on record acknowledged service.
4. When the Cause was called out for hearing on 3rd April 2017, none of the parties were present or represented.
5. With no evidence that Summons were served and further considering the failure to appear for the hearing, the Court orders that the Cause be dismissed with no order as to costs.
Delivered, dated and signed in Nairobi on this 5th day of April 2017.
Radido Stephen
Judge
Representations
For Claimant Wamalwa, Abdi & Co. Advocates
For Respondents no papers filed
Court Assistant Nixon