Leshishi v Kenya Bankers Savings and Credit Cooperative Society Limited (Cause E386 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 585 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment Court refused to dismiss an employee's claim for delay because the record showed active pre-trial steps within the first year.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Respondent's application to dismiss the Claim for want of prosecution should be granted
- 2.Whether there was inaction justifying dismissal of the Claim under Rule 16 of the E&LRC (Procedure) Rules, 2016
Key legal issues
#Whether the Claim should be dismissed for want of prosecution under Rule 16 of the E&LRC (Procedure) Rules, 2016
The application was declined because the record showed substantial pre-trial activity, including appearance, statement of response and counterclaim, pre-trial conferencing, correspondence seeking hearing dates, and multiple mention dates, showing no inaction warranting dismissal
Rule 16 permits dismissal where no action has been taken within one year of filing. Here the Claim was filed on 12th May 2021 and within that year the Respondent entered appearance and filed a Statement of Response and Counterclaim, parties attended pre-trial conferencing before the Deputy Registrar, both advocates wrote letters seeking mention or hearing dates, and the Claim was mentioned on seven occasions. The Claimant therefore was not in prolonged slumber.
Legal principles established
#- Dismissal for want of prosecution in employment claims is governed by Rule 16 of the E&LRC (Procedure) Rules, 2016, not the Civil Procedure Act and Rules
- A claim will not be dismissed for want of prosecution where the record shows pre-trial activity and diligence by the claimant within one year of filing
Court orders
#- 1.The Application filed by the Respondent dated 24th August 2023 is declined
- 2.The Registry to assign the Parties a hearing date, as soon as practicable
- 3.Costs in the cause
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 16 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The Application is made under the Civil Procedure Act and Rules, which do not regulate dismissal for want of prosecution, in employment Claims filed in this Court.
There have been plenty of pre-trial activities going on, and the Claimant cannot be accused of filing his Claim, and going into a prolonged slumber thereafter, warranting dismissal of his Claim for want of prosecution
It is ordered: a. The Application filed by the Respondent dated 24th August 2023 is declined. b. The Registry to assign the Parties a hearing date, as soon as practicable. c. Costs in the cause.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment excerpt does not state the case title, case number or neutral citation
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Leshishi v Kenya Bankers Savings and Credit Cooperative Society Limited (Cause E386 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 585 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). not stated in the excerpt provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/585/eng@2024-03-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.