[2018] KEELRC 1857 (KLR)
The court found that there was no evidence of willful disobedience of its order by the respondents. The affidavits presented by the applicant were found unreliable, particularly due to inconsistencies and false dates. The court noted that the respondents had allowed the applicant to engage with parents and had not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELRC 1857 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Virginia Wanjiku Mwangi; Respondent: David Mwara Chira; Respondent: Board of Management, Ndimaini Primary School
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 194 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Contempt Application / Ruling on Contempt Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- AN Makau
- Legal Topics
- Contempt of Court, Enforcement of Court Orders, Employment Disputes
- 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
Virginia Wanjiku Mwangi
Applicant
David Mwara Chira
Respondent
Board of Management, Ndimaini Primary School
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application / Ruling on Contempt Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondents willfully disobeyed a court order.
- 2 Whether the conduct of the respondents amounts to contempt of court.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was no evidence of willful disobedience of its order by the respondents. The affidavits presented by the applicant were found unreliable, particularly due to inconsistencies and false dates. The court noted that the respondents had allowed the applicant to engage with parents and had not prevented her from teaching. The delay in bringing the contempt application further undermined the credibility of the applicant's claims. Consequently, the court held that the threshold for contempt had not been met and dismissed the application.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The contempt of court application is dismissed.
- Each party shall bear their own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT & LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA
AT NYERI
CAUSE NO. 194 OF 2017
VIRGINIA WANJIKU MWANGI...........................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
1. DAVID MWARA CHIRA
2. BOARD OF MANAGEMENT
NDIMANINI PRIMARY SCHOOL.................................RESPONDENTS
RULING
1. The Claimant/Applicant seeks the punishment of the Head Teacher Ndimaini Primary School and the 2nd Respondent for contempt of court. The application for contempt was made on 25th January 2018 and it was expressed to be under the provisions of Section 5 of the Contempt of Court Act as read together with Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act. The application is supported by the affidavit of Virginia Mwangi. In her affidavit she asserts that the order issued by the Court was blatantly breached by the alleged contemnors. She stated that the contemnors ignored the court order and denied her access to her work station on opening school on 2nd January 2018 and that their conduct was contemptuous of the dignity of the court. The alleged contemnors replied through the affidavit of David Chira, the 1st Respondent and in his affidavit, he deponed that the Respondents had complied with the Court order and had allowed the Claimant to engage with the parents on modalities of teaching at the ECD centre.
2. In order for the Court to hold a person in contempt, the court must find that there was willful disobedience of a court order. There is no evidence adduced to warrant a finding that the Respondents have breached the court order. The Respondents assert that the Claimant is at liberty to teach and that in the third term she failed to attend to teach the students. The affidavit of Joseph Muriuki Githure is not one the court can rely on as he has sworn an affidavit with a false date and facts. He does not state what he was doing on 29th July 2017 at the shopping center at 12. 00 when the BOM Chairperson is said to have gathered a group of people. He later recants this in a further affidavit and says that it was actually on 20th July 2017 when the incident happened. If the contempt occurred in July 2017, why was no action taken till January 2018? I find it unbelievable that the Claimant was not aggrieved after the super sleuth who followed people at a distance saw the desks being taken out of the classroom in July 2017. From the foregoing I find that there is no evidence suggesting that there is contempt of court and accordingly, I dismiss the contempt of court application and order that each party bears their own costs.
It is so ordered.
Dated and delivered at Nyeri this 10th day of April 2018
NZIOKI wa MAKAU
JUDGE