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

Nderitu v Fincom Technologies Limited (Cause 2151 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 709 (KLR) (20 March 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEELRC 709 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
709
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 709 (KLR)
Decided
20 March 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeRecusal MotionPostureRecusal Motion GrantedCoramDr. Jacob Gakeri
Holding

The court granted the recusal motion, directing the Hon. Justice Dr. Jacob Gakeri to recuse himself and the matter to be referred to the Principal Judge for re-allocation.

Facts

The Claimant, Alex Peter Wambugu Nderitu, sought recusal of the Hon. Justice Dr. Jacob Gakeri due to alleged associations and interactions that may have caused prejudice or bias.

Issues

  1. Whether the Hon. Justice Dr. Jacob Gakeri should recuse himself from presiding over the matter due to potential bias or prejudice

Reasoning

The court found reasonable grounds for the recusal motion based on the applicant's associations and interactions with the Hon. Justice Dr. Jacob Gakeri, which may have caused prejudice or bias.

Outcome

The Hon. Justice Dr. Jacob Gakeri was recused from the case, and the matter was referred to the Principal Judge for re-allocation.

Orders

  • The Hon. Justice Dr. Jacob Gakeri is recused from presiding over the matter.
  • The matter is referred to the Principal Judge for re-allocation to a different judge.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (5)
  • Webb v The Queen (Supra)
  • R V S (RD) (1977) 3 SCR 484
  • Kaplan & Stratton v Z Engineering Construction Ltd & 2 others (2000) eKLR
  • Hon. (Lady) Justice Kalpana H. Rawal v Judicial Service Commission & 2 others (2016) eKLR
  • Hon. (Lady) Justice Kalpana H. Rawal v Judicial Service Commission (Supra)
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