[2021] KEELC 4077 (KLR)
The court found that the issues in Cause No. 36 of 2020 and Cause No. 43 of 2018 are identical, both concerning alleged violation of fair labour practices by employing the claimants as casual workers for over four years. To avoid duplication and ensure efficient administration of justice, the court ordered...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELC 4077 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Victor Okoth Matinde; Applicant: Grace Adhiambo Otieno; Applicant: Rose Adhiambo Orina; Applicant: Denver Okeyo Omolo; Applicant: Kennedy Odhiambo Adiko; Applicant: Jack Ochieng; Applicant: Esther Adhiambo Obado; Applicant: Veronica Adhiambo Ondingo; Applicant: Molly Agumbe; Applicant: Robert Apunda; Respondent: Migori County Government; Respondent: Migori County Public Service Board
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 36 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Consolidation and Interim Orders
- Outcome
- Application for consolidation allowed; interim orders extended to consolidated suit.
- Judges
- MN Nduma
- Legal Topics
- Casual Employment, Fair Labour Practices, Consolidation of Suits
- 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
Victor Okoth Matinde
Applicant
Grace Adhiambo Otieno
Applicant
Rose Adhiambo Orina
Applicant
Denver Okeyo Omolo
Applicant
Kennedy Odhiambo Adiko
Applicant
Jack Ochieng
Applicant
Esther Adhiambo Obado
Applicant
Veronica Adhiambo Ondingo
Applicant
Molly Agumbe
Applicant
Robert Apunda
Applicant
Migori County Government
Respondent
Migori County Public Service Board
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Consolidation and Interim Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondents violated the applicants. right to fair labour practice by employing them as casual workers for over four years.
- 2 Whether the two causes should be consolidated for efficient and orderly hearing and determination.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the issues in Cause No. 36 of 2020 and Cause No. 43 of 2018 are identical, both concerning alleged violation of fair labour practices by employing the claimants as casual workers for over four years. To avoid duplication and ensure efficient administration of justice, the court ordered consolidation of the two matters, designating Cause No. 43 of 2018 as the lead file. The interim orders previously issued in Cause No. 43 of 2018, which maintained the status quo and protected the claimants. employment, were extended to apply equally to Cause No. 36 of 2020. The court further directed that the consolidated suit be set down for hearing, emphasizing the need to avoid...
Court Disposition
Application for consolidation allowed; interim orders extended to consolidated suit.
Orders
- Cause No. 36 of 2020 and Cause No. 43 of 2018 are consolidated, with Cause No. 43 of 2018 as the lead file.
- The interim orders issued in Cause No. 43 of 2018 apply equally to Cause No. 36 of 2020.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
37 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT KISUMU
CAUSE NO. 36 OF 2020
VICTOR OKOTH MATINDE........................................1ST CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
GRACE ADHIAMBO OTIENO...................................2ND CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
ROSE ADHIAMBO ORINA........................................3RD .CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
DENVER OKEYO OMOLO........................................4TH CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
KENNEDY ODHIAMBO ADIKO...............................5TH CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
JACK OCHIENG CLAIMANT/APPLICANT...........6TH CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
ESTHER ADHIAMBO OBADO..................................7TH CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
VERONICA ADHIAMBO ONDINGO........................8TH CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
MOLLY AGUMBE........................................................9TH CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
ROBERT APUNDA.....................................................10TH CLAIMANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
MIGORI COUNTY GOVERNMENT.............................................1ST RESPONDENT
MIGORI COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD........................2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The suit, Cause No. 43 of 2018, Victor Okoth Matinde and 10 others –vs- Migori County Government and 10 others and Cause No. 36 of 2020 Kobado Eric Eeja –vs- Migori County Government and Another deal with the same dispute and issues for determination being: -
“Whether the Respondents have violated the Applicants/Claimants right to fair Labour Practice by employing them as casual workers for over 4 years.
2. The Court delivered a ruling in Cause No. 43 of 2018 on 20/9/2018 directing: -
(a) The prevailing status quo as between the claimants/Applicants and the Respondents be maintained pending the hearing and determination of the main suit.
(b) For avoidance of doubt, the Claimants/Applicants continue to be employed and provide services to the Respondents in their present capacities or as otherwise determined by the Respondent, until the dispute is resolved on the merits.
3. The present application in Cause 36 of 2020 is similar in all respects to the application in Cause No. 43 of 2018. The only difference is that there has not been an earlier determination at the interlocutory stage as has happened in Cause No. 43 of 2018.
4. Cognisant of this fact, and being in possession of the two matters, at this moment and in order to facilitate orderly hearing and determination of the common dispute in the two matters, the Court makes an order consolidating the two matters with Cause No. No. 43 of 2018 being the lead file.
5. Meanwhile the Ruling made by the Court in respect of the Application dated 15/5/2020 in Cause No. 43 is to apply equally to Application dated 21/5/2020 in Cause No. 36 of 2020, the two matters now being the consolidated suit.
6. The consolidated suit to be set down for hearing as stated in the said ruling.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this11th day of March, 2021.
MATHEWS N. NDUMA
JUDGE
ORDER
In view of the declaration of measures restricting court of operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic and in light of the directions issued by his Lordship, the Chief Justice on 15th March 2020, this ruling has been delivered to the parties online with their consent. They have waived compliance with Order 21 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules which requires that all judgments and Judgment be pronounced in open court. In permitting this course, this court has been guided by Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution which requires the court to eschew undue technicalities in delivering justice, the right of access to justice guaranteed to every person under Article 48 of the Constitution and the provisions of Section 18 of the Civil Procedure Act (chapter 21 of the Laws of Kenya) which impose on this court the duty of the court, inter alia, to use suitable technology to enhance the overriding objective which is to facilitate just, expeditious, proportionate and affordable resolution of civil disputes.
MATHEWS N. NDUMA
JUDGE
Appearances
Claimants in person
Abisai & Co. Advocates for the 1st and 2nd Respondents
Chrispo: Court clerk.