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

Bedrock Holdings Limited v Wangari (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E003 of 2023) [2023] KEELRC 2293 (KLR) (29 September 2023) (Judgment)

[2023] KEELRC 2293 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2293
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 2293 (KLR)
Decided
29 September 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppeal from a judgment awarding costs 11 months after the original judgmentCoramONESMUS N MAKAU
Holding

The appeal is time barred.

Facts

The respondent sued the appellant alleging unfair termination and sought compensatory damages, terminal dues, and costs. The respondent was awarded only terminal benefits and a certificate of service, but the appellant challenged the costs award. The respondent then applied for costs, which the lower court set aside and granted.

Issues

  1. Whether the appeal is time barred.
  2. Whether the trial court violated the doctrine of functus officio.
  3. Whether the appeal has merits and ought to be allowed.
  4. Where costs of the appeal should be awarded.

Reasoning

The appeal was filed out of the statutory period of 30 days from the date of the ruling. The court found no sufficient cause to justify the late filing of the appeal.

Outcome

The appeal is dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The typed proceedings and ruling were not supplied by the lower court within the time for filing the appeal.
  • The appeal was filed out of time.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Act
  • ELRC Procedure Rules
Cases cited (2)
  • Selle v Associated Motor Boat Co. (1968) EA 123
  • Civil Procedure Act, section 79 G
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