[2023] KEELRC 165 (KLR)

[2023] KEELRC 165 (KLR)

The court held that while compliance with court orders is mandatory, a 24-hour delay in filing pleadings and documents does not warrant the extreme sanction of striking out those documents. The court reasoned that such a sanction would undo the parties' consent to allow late filing and would convert the scheduled...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELRC 165 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Abigail Awuor Yallo; Respondent: Faulu Microfinance Bank Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause E266 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Respondent's Witness Statement and Documents for Late Filing
Outcome
Application declined; respondent to pay costs to claimant; hearing to proceed as scheduled.
Judges
J Rika
Legal Topics
Late Filing of Documents, Procedural Non Compliance, Striking Out Pleadings
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Late Filing of Documents Procedural Non Compliance Striking Out Pleadings

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abigail Awuor Yallo

Applicant

Faulu Microfinance Bank Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Respondent's Witness Statement and Documents for Late Filing

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's witness statement and documents filed 24 hours late should be struck out from the record.
  2. 2 Whether a short delay in compliance with a procedural order justifies the draconian remedy of striking out pleadings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that while compliance with court orders is mandatory, a 24-hour delay in filing pleadings and documents does not warrant the extreme sanction of striking out those documents. The court reasoned that such a sanction would undo the parties' consent to allow late filing and would convert the scheduled full hearing into a formal proof hearing, contrary to the parties' intentions. The court exercised its discretion to decline the application to strike out, instead ordering the respondent to pay costs to the claimant as a proportionate response to the procedural breach.

Court Disposition

Application declined; respondent to pay costs to claimant; hearing to proceed as scheduled.

Orders

  • The application filed by the claimant dated August 1, 2022 is declined.
  • The respondent shall pay costs of Kshs 4,000 to the claimant before February 1, 2023.