Skip to document content Go to main menu Go to search

Kingori v Plastic Electronics Limited (Cause E126 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 608 (KLR) (28 February 2025) (Ruling)

Kingori v Plastic Electronics Limited (Cause E126 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 608 (KLR) (28 February 2025) (Ruling)
Citation
Kingori v Plastic Electronics Limited [2025] KEELRC 608 (KLR)
Media Neutral Citation
[2025] KEELRC 608 (KLR)
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Outcome
Allowed
Case number
Cause E126 of 2023
Attorneys
Judges
AK Nzei
Judgment date
28 February 2025
Language
English
Type
Judgment
Original source file
Download DOCX (45.3 KB)
Date published
10 March 2025
Case action
Ruling
Court division
Employment and Labour
Filing county
Nairobi
Order
I will, nevertheless, exercise the Court’s discretion in favour of the Claimant. I make the following Orders:- a. The Claimant shall prosecute the suit herein within 12 months of today, failing which the same shall stand dismissed for want of prosecution. b. Pre-trial directions shall be taken on 24th April, 2025. c. An appropriate Notice shall be served by the Claimant on the Respondent, and an affidavit of service shall be filed.
Skip to document content
1.The suit herein was instituted by the Claimant vide a Statement of Claim dated 16th February, 2023 and filed in this Court on 17th February, 2023. The Respondent entered appearance and filed Response to the Claimant’s claim, and a list and bundle of documents on 9th February, 2024. Thereafter, everything on the suit went silent. The Claimant is not shown to have taken any step towards setting the suit down for hearing.
2.On 2nd January, 2025, this Court’s Deputy Registrar sent out a notice to the Claimant, calling upon him to show cause why the suit herein could not be dismissed for want of prosecution.
3.Rule 43 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules 2024 provides as follows:-“(1)In any suit in which no application has been made in accordance with Rule 31 or no action has been taken by either party within one year from the date of its filing, the Court may give notice in writing to the parties to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed and, if no cause is shown to its satisfaction, may dismiss the suit.(2)If reasonable cause is given to the satisfaction of the Court, it may make such orders as it thinks fit to obtain the expeditious hearing and determination of the suit.(3)Any party to the suit may apply for dismissal as provided in sub-rule (1).(4)The Court may dismiss the suit for non-compliance with any direction given under this rule or rule 31.”
4.When the suit came up in Court on 29th January, 2025 for the parties to show cause, I directed the Claimant to file an affidavit within 14 days of the said date showing cause why the suit could not be dismissed for want of prosecution, failing which the suit would stand dismissed for want of prosecution.
5.Vide an affidavit sworn on 6th February, 2025 and filed herein, the Claimant explained that after the Respondent entered appearance and filed a Statement of Response on 16th February, 2024, the Claimant was informed that the matter would first go for pre-trial [conference], and that there were no dates available in the year 2024. That failure to set the suit down for hearing was as a result of an Advocate’s mistake, which should not be visited on the Claimant. The Claimant has not, however, told the Court what effort he made between February 2023 when the suit was filed and January 2025 when the notice to show cause was issued, to follow up on the suit herein with his Advocates on record and to ensure that the same was fast-tracked and fixed for hearing. A litigant who files a suit and goes to sleep, only waking when a notice to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed is issued, cannot be heard to plead “Mistake of an Advocate”. Both the litigant and his Advocate would stand blamed for non-prosecution of the suit.
6.The Judiciary has, over the years, been relentlessly accused of failure to hear and to dispose of matters filed in the Courts. A time must come when litigants who have clearly been indolent, and Advocates who represent them in such Court matters, bear and/or share in the blame for non-prosecution of cases and the resultant build-up of backlog of cases in our Courts.
7.I will, nevertheless, exercise the Court’s discretion in favour of the Claimant. I make the following Orders:-a.The Claimant shall prosecute the suit herein within 12 months of today, failing which the same shall stand dismissed for want of prosecution.b.Pre-trial directions shall be taken on 24th April, 2025.c.An appropriate Notice shall be served by the Claimant on the Respondent, and an affidavit of service shall be filed.
8.Orders accordingly.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025AGNES KITIKU NZEIJUDGEORDERThis Ruling has been delivered via Microsoft Teams Online Platform. A signed copy will be availed to each party upon payment of the applicable Court fees.AGNES KITIKU NZEIJUDGEAppearance:Mr. Olonde for the ClaimantNo appearance for the Respondent
▲ To the top