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

Wilfred Wafula v Creative Consolidated Systems Limited [2021] KEELRC 546 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 546 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
546
Citation
[2021] KEELRC 546 (KLR)
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeAppealPostureAppeal from a dismissal of a claim for non-attendanceCoramKebira Ocharo
The claimant's application is allowed, and the claim is reinstated.

Facts

The claimant, Wilfred Wafula, filed a claim against Creative Consolidated Systems Limited. The claim was dismissed by Justice Kebira Ocharo on July 28, 2021, due to non-attendance.

Issues

  • Whether the claimant has established sufficient cause to warrant the orders sought

Reasoning

The court held that the claimant's counsel's oversight in not diarizing the matter was an excusable mistake and not the claimant's fault, thus allowing the claimant's application.

Outcome

The claimant's application is allowed, and the claim is reinstated.

Orders

  • Reinstatement of the suit and setting it down for hearing to be determined on merit

Remedies

  • Costs of the application shall be in the cause

Authorities cited

Legislation (4)
  • Article 159 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011
  • Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Cases cited (2)
  • Wachira Karani =vs= Bildad Wachira (2016) eKLR Mativo J.
  • CMC Holdings Limited =vs= Nzioka (2004) 1 KLR 173
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case