Juma v Pinkertons’ Kenya Limited (Appeal E164 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2161 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court struck out an appeal filed over a year late, ruling it was a nullity, but gave the appellant 60 days to file afresh.
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 application seeking to strike out the Memorandum of Appeal and Record of Appeal was merited
Key legal issues
#Whether an appeal filed out of time without leave of court is competent
Such an appeal is a nullity and must be struck out; leave under Section 79G must be sought before lodging an out-of-time appeal
Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act requires appeals from subordinate courts to be filed within 30 days. The memorandum and record of appeal were filed over a year after judgment, and no application for extension of time was ever made. Following the Supreme Court's decision in Salat v IEBC, documents filed out of time without leave are nullities. The certification of proceedings does not affect the obligation to file the appeal in time.
Whether the incomplete record of appeal divests the court of jurisdiction
Yes; a record of appeal lacking a certified copy of proceedings under Order 42 rule 13(4)(c) and (d) is incompetent and divests the court of jurisdiction
The record of appeal did not include a certified copy of the proceedings, contrary to Order 42 rule 13(4)(c) and (d) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Citing Bwana Mohamed Bwana v Silvano Buko Bonaya, a court cannot exercise adjudicatory powers without a record of appeal. As a practical matter, the court cannot determine the appeal without the trial court's proceedings.
Whether the mistake of the appellant's advocate excuses the delay
No; the mistake of an advocate cannot cure the delay where the client made no effort to follow up
The appellant blamed his former advocate's maternity leave for the failure to file. The court found the assertions bald and unsupported by evidence that the appellant made any effort to contact the advocate. The case belonged to the appellant, who was obliged to follow up. Article 159 of the Constitution could not aid him because the defect went to the root of the appeal rather than being a mere technicality.
Legal principles established
#- An appeal filed out of time and without leave of court is a nullity and of no legal consequence
- The incompleteness of a record of appeal divests the court of jurisdiction to determine the appeal
Court orders
#- 1.The memorandum of appeal and entire record of appeal (which was incomplete) struck off the record
- 2.The appellant granted leave of 60 days to file a fresh appeal in compliance with the rules of the court and provide hard copies to court
- 3.Costs of the application to the applicant/respondent
- 4.Mention on 22nd September 2025 to confirm compliance and issue directions
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Subordinate court (trial court)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act and Section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act
Relief refused
#Admission of the appeal as filed out of time / substantively hearing the appeal
The appeal was filed way out of time without leave of court and the record was incomplete; the documents were a nullity
Costs
Costs of the application to the applicant/respondent
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 memorandum of appeal and entire record of appeal (which was incomplete) is struck ofi the record. The appellant is granted leave of 60 days to file a fresh appeal in compliance with the rules of the court and provide hard copies to court. Costs of the application to the applicant / respondent.
an appeal filed out of time and without leave of court, renders such a document a nullity and of no legal consequence
The incompleteness of the record of appeal divests the court of jurisdiction to consider the legal and factual controversies in the issues before it.
There is a discernible pattern of chronic indolence in each step of the appeal process.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal inconsistency on the dates of the Memorandum and Record of Appeal
Contradictory filing dates in submissions - applicant says filed 5th September 2023, replying affidavit says filed 2024
Applicant's submissions describe the appellant as having lodged the appeal 'on the 5 of September 2023' while the same submissions elsewhere state the documents were 'dated 23.08.23'
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Nyabonei & another v Chemutai (Environment and Land Appeal E033 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 2 (KLR)[2026] KEELC 2 (KLR)5 Jan 2026
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Juma v Pinkertons’ Kenya Limited (Appeal E164 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2161 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2161/eng@2025-07-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.