Lizzie Wanjiku Mwangi v Kenya Power and Lighting Company Limited

3. The Applicant avers that she sustained an injury on 17 th October 2024 whilst on duty. She further contends that the Director assessed her injuries and awarded her compensation of Ksh. 3,930,734.50. 4. The Applicant contends that the Respondent was notified of the award. She avers that the Respondent was supposed to pay the amount awarded to her within 90 days but did not do so. 5. The Applicant contends that the Respondent neither lodged an objection nor an appeal against the award as required by law. As such, she prays for adoption of the award as the court’s judgment. 6. The application was initially filed against the current Respondent and Old Mutual Insurance Company Ltd. However, through a Notice of Withdrawal dated 15 th April 2026, the Applicant withdrew the claim against Old Mutual Insurance Company Ltd thus leaving the current Respondent as the sole Respondent in the action. 7. Prior to withdrawal of the action against Old Mutual Insurance Company Ltd, it had filed an affidavit dated 2 nd February 2026 to oppose the application. However, the record shows that the current Respondent did not file a response to the motion. 8. Despite not having filed a response to the application, the Respondent has filed submissions on the application. It (the Respondent) purports to rely on the affidavit which was filed MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. E428 OF 2025 2

page 2 of 6

by Old Mutual Insurance Company Ltd to oppose the application. Analysis 9. Rule 48 of the Employment and Labour Relations (Procedure) Rules, 2024 provides for the manner of opposing an application which is lodged before the court. The rule obligates a party who is opposed to an application to file a replying affidavit or grounds of opposition or preliminary objection. Rule 51 on the other hand requires a party who has opposed an application in the manner prescribed by rule 48 to file and serve submissions on the application. 10. In essence, a Respondent to an application can only properly oppose the application by filing either a replying affidavit or grounds of opposition or a preliminary objection. As the record shows, the current Respondent did not file either of the aforesaid instruments. 11. The Respondent was not entitled to file submissions on the application without first filing either a replying affidavit or grounds of opposition or a preliminary objection. Equally, the Respondent is not entitled to rely on the replying affidavit filed by Old Mutual Insurance Company Ltd, which has since been dropped from the proceedings, to oppose the application. The two were distinct parties to the action MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. E428 OF 2025 3

page 3 of 6

and were sued individually. Therefore, they had an individual responsibility to file their respective objections to the motion. As such, the current Respondent has essentially not opposed the application. 12. Be that as it may, the court has considered the submissions by the Respondent and noted that they purport to question the legality Respondent and proportionality alleges that of the the award. The Applicant has not demonstrated that the award was arrived at through lawful procedure and proper consideration of the available medical evidence to enable the court to adopt it (the award) as a judgment of the court. The Respondent asserts that an award by the Director does not automatically become binding merely because it has been issued. 13. The Respondent insinuates that the injuries which the Applicant suffered do not warrant an award of Ksh. 3,930,734.50. It contends that there is a clear disconnect between the injuries and the quantum of the award. For this reason, the Respondent invites the court to decline to adopt the award or even grant the request for interest thereon. 14. Whether the court is entitled to consider the merits of an award through adoption proceedings was considered by the Court of Appeal in the case of Charles v Cheto [2025] KECA 784 (KLR). According to the Judges of the aforesaid court, the role of this court at this stage is limited to adopting the award as rendered. It (the court) has no MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. E428 OF 2025 4

page 4 of 6

mandate to re-open the award for purposes of considering its merits. 15. The issues which the Respondent invites the court to consider through these proceedings ought to have been the subject of objection proceedings or an appeal under sections 51 and 52 of the Work Injury Benefits Act. They cannot be raised in proceedings for adoption of the award. Determination 16. Having regard to the foregoing, the court finds that the Respondent has, in law, not opposed the application under consideration. 17. That said, even if the Respondent’s submissions on the application were to be considered as a proper response to the motion, they (the submissions) raise issues which ought to have been taken up through objection proceedings and or an appeal under sections 51 and 52 of the Work Injury Benefits Act and not through the instant adoption proceedings. 18. As such, the application dated 4 th November 2025 is allowed and the award by the Director dated 13th November 2024 is adopted as a judgment of the court. 19. Accordingly, a decree is hereby issued in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent for Ksh. 3,930,734.50 in terms of the aforesaid award. 20. The award attracts interest at court rates from 13 th November 2024. MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. E428 OF 2025 5

page 5 of 6

21. The Applicant is awarded costs of the application. Dated, signed and delivered on the 8th day of October, 2026 B. O. M. MANANI JUDGE In the presence of: …………….for the Applicant …………….for the Respondent ORDER In light of the directions issued on 12 th July 2022 by her Ladyship, the Chief Justice with respect to online court proceedings, this decision has been delivered to the parties online with their consent, the parties having waived compliance with Rule 28 (3) of the ELRC Procedure Rules which requires that all judgments and rulings shall be dated, signed and delivered in the open court. B. O. M MANANI MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. E428 OF 2025 6

page 6 of 6