[2018] KEELRC 79 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's delay of over eight months in seeking leave to appeal, and two years from the date of taxation, was inordinate and unjustified. The explanation that the failure was due to an inadvertent mistake by assisting counsel and pupil was rejected as insufficient. The court emphasized the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELRC 79 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Wycliffe Chitayi Muhalya; Respondent: Dorothy Awiti Omboto t/a DAO & Associates Advocates; Respondent: Wilfrida A. Osodo t/a Wilfrida A. Osodo Advocates
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 230 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- MN Nduma
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Leave to Appeal, Extension of Time, Advocates Remuneration Order
- 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
Wycliffe Chitayi Muhalya
Applicant
Dorothy Awiti Omboto t/a DAO & Associates Advocates
Respondent
Wilfrida A. Osodo t/a Wilfrida A. Osodo Advocates
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to leave to appeal against the ruling upholding taxation by the Deputy Registrar.
- 2 Whether the delay in seeking leave to appeal and extension of time is excusable.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's delay of over eight months in seeking leave to appeal, and two years from the date of taxation, was inordinate and unjustified. The explanation that the failure was due to an inadvertent mistake by assisting counsel and pupil was rejected as insufficient. The court emphasized the importance of expedient delivery of justice and the claimant's right to enjoy the fruits of judgment without undue delay. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal and extension of time was dismissed for lack of merit, with costs awarded to the claimant/respondent.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal and extension of time is dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the claimant/respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT KISUMU
MISC. APPLICATION NO. 230 OF 2015
(Before Hon. Justice Mathews N. Nduma)
WYCLIFFE CHITAYI MUHALYA ...................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
DOROTHY AWITI OMBOTO T/A
DAO & ASSOCIATES ADVOCATES................................1ST RESPONDENT
WILFRIDA A. OSODO T/A
WILFRIDA A. OSODO ADVOCATES ..............................2ND RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
1. In this matter the Applicant purports to have filed an application to the Court of Appeal in Kisumu for leave to file a Notice of Appeal and Memorandum of Appeal out of time in Kisumu Court of Appeal Civil Application no. 98 of 2017.
2. The intended Appeal is against a ruling by the Labour Court delivered on 22nd September, 2017 in which the court upheld a Taxation by the Deputy Registrar in Kisumu ELRC Case No.83 of 2013 delivered on 27th July, 2016.
3. In terms of paragraphs 11(3) and (4) of the Advocates Remuneration Order –
“(3) any person aggrieved by the decision of the Judge upon any objection referred to such Judge under sub-paragraph (2) may, with the leave of the Judge but not otherwise appeal to the Court of Appeal.”
4. An application to amend the Notice of Motion so as to include a prayer to seek leave to appeal and extension of time in which to file an appeal was made on 4th May, 2018. The amendment was granted. The Applicant states that failure to seek leave before this court was an inadvertent mistake on the part of the assisting counsel and pupil who assisted the 1st Respondent in preparing the pleadings.
5. This leave to note an appeal has been sought more than 8 months from the date of the ruling of the court and two years from the date the taxing master concluded the taxation.
6. This is indeed inordinate delay and counsel cannot be heard to blame his pupil for a mistake in erroneously noting an application for leave to file an appeal before the court of appeal.
7. The Claimant is entitled to expedient delivery of justice and enjoy the fruits of his judgment.
8. The application lacks merit and is dismissed with costs to the Claimant/Respondent.
Ruling Dated, Signed and delivered this 6TH day of DECEMBER, 2018
Mathews N. Nduma
Judge
Appearances
Mr. Nyamwea for Respondent/Applicant Olel, Onyango,
M/s. Omolo for Claimant/Respondent
Chrispo – Court Clerk