Commission for Human Rights and Justice v Kenya Fishing Industries Corporation; Nyaberi & another (Interested Parties) (Petition 013 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1090 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court set aside its own judgment because a government filing-system glitch hid the State's filed defence documents from the judge.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether there is an error apparent on the face of the record justifying review of the judgment delivered on 13 February 2025 under Rule 74 of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules
- 2.Whether the respondent's filed Response, Replying Affidavit, written submissions and List of Authorities were omitted from the court's analysis despite due diligence
Key legal issues
#Whether the failure of the court to access and consider the respondent's filed documents constitutes an error apparent on the face of the record
Yes - the documents were filed in good time but were not accessed by the court due to CTS processing errors; the error is apparent and must be remedied by setting aside the judgment.
The court verified on the CTS that the respondent had filed a Notice of Appointment, Response, Replying Affidavit, written submissions and List of Authorities between November 2024 and January 2025. The judgment of 13 February 2025 recorded that no response or submissions had been filed. The CTS, which accepts documents from the Office of the Attorney General without payment, had errors in how information is processed and relayed for the judge to access. The omission of duly filed documents, despite due diligence, satisfied the Rule 74 ground of error apparent on the face of the record.
Legal principles established
#- A review may be granted to correct an apparent error or omission on the part of the court; the error must be self-evident and not require elaborate argument.
- Errors contemplated under Rule 74 or Order 45 should be errors on the record, not errors of law.
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 25 February 2025 is allowed
- 2.Judgment delivered on 13 February 2025 is set aside
- 3.Parties to attend and address the court on the filed records
- 4.No orders on costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 74 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules; Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules
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 dated 25 February 2025 with merit and is hereby allowed. Judgment delivered on 13 February 2025 is hereby set aside to enable parties to attend and address the court on the filed records. No orders on costs.
A review may be granted whenever the court considers that it is necessary to correct an apparent error or omission on the part of the court. The error or omission must be self-evident and should not require an elaborate argument to be established.
The CTS is configured to accept these documents without payment. Still, there are errors in how this information is processed vis-à-vis approval and how the information is relayed for the judge to access the filed records without payment.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment recites that the application was brought 'under the provisions of Section 74 [Rule] of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules' - a rule rather than a section, indicating a drafting slip.
Averments conflict on the date of filing of submissions: the affidavit refers to written submissions and list of authorities filed 28 January 2025, but elsewhere states 27 January 2025.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Commission for Human Rights and Justice v Kenya Fishing Industries Corporation; Nyaberi & another (Interested Parties) (Petition 013 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1090 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated on the face of the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1090/eng@2025-04-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.