SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Lucy Muingo Kusewa & another v Embassy of Sweden, Nairobi [2019] KEELRC 456 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 456 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
456
Citation
[2019] KEELRC 456 (KLR)
Decided
11 October 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppeal from a dismissal of a motion to strike out claims on grounds of sovereign and diplomatic authorityCoramHellen S. Wasilwa
Holding

The Court finds the application has merit and stays proceedings in this claim pending the hearing and disposal of the appeal already filed.

Facts

Two claims were filed against the Embassy of Sweden, Nairobi, one by Lucy Muingo Kusewa and another by Renald Mboje Mjomba. The claims were dismissed by the High Court on July 31, 2017, and the respondent filed an appeal. The claims were then heard by the Employment and Labour Relations Court.

Issues

  1. Whether the Employment and Labour Relations Court should grant a stay of proceedings pending the hearing and determination of the appeal
  2. Whether the claims should be dismissed due to the doctrine of diplomatic immunity

Reasoning

The Court finds that the appeal is still pending and that it would be a waste of time to hear the claim, which may render the hearing an academic exercise if the appeal is allowed.

Outcome

The application is granted and the proceedings are stayed.

Orders

  • Stay of proceedings in the claim pending the hearing and disposal of the appeal

Authorities cited

Cases cited (5)
  • Symon Nyamu Muthigani v Charity Wangui Munene (2015) eKLR
  • Global Tours & Travels Limited v Nairobi HC Winding Up Cause No. 43 of 2000 (2014) eKLR
  • Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited v Esther Wanjiru Wokabi (2014) eKLR
  • Bah v Libyan Embassy (2006) 2006 (1) BLR 22 (IC)
  • S v India (1982) ILR 14
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case