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

Catherine Mbinya Musembi v Paksa Construction Limited [2022] KEELRC 727 (KLR)

[2022] KEELRC 727 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
727
Citation
[2022] KEELRC 727 (KLR)
Decided
17 February 2022
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeLabour DisputePostureApplication to stay judgment and re-open caseCoramMathews N. Nduma
Holding

The application is granted, and the case is re-opened for the limited purpose of cross-examination. The respondent is granted leave to call witnesses in defense.

Facts

The respondent failed to attend a hearing on September 21, 2021, due to a mistake in their registry. The claimant filed an ex parte application for a judgment date on February 24, 2022.

Issues

  1. Whether the respondent's failure to attend the hearing was due to a genuine mistake
  2. Whether the application should be allowed to re-open the case and recall witnesses for cross-examination

Reasoning

The Court finds the respondent's mistake genuine and allows the application to re-open the case, as it would be inimical to justice to deny the respondent a fair hearing.

Outcome

Application granted

Orders

  • Re-open the claimant's case for limited purpose of cross-examination
  • Grant leave to respondent to call witnesses in defense
  • Fix hearing date on the date of delivery of this ruling
  • Arrest the intended exparte judgment to be delivered on February 24, 2022

Remedies

  • Throwaway costs in respect of the hearing of September 21, 2021, and submissions already filed by the claimants in the sum of Kshs 10,000

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Article 50 and 159 of the Constitution of Kenya
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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case