Ochieng Owiti & others v Anthony Oluoch t/a A. T Oluoch and Company Advocates & 2 others [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Hon. Lady Justice Maureen Onyango
Judgment Date
October 16, 2025
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Ochieng Owiti & others v Anthony Oluoch t/a A. T Oluoch and Company Advocates & 2 others [2020] eKLR, analyzing key legal principles and outcomes to understand the implications for future cases.

Case Brief: Ochieng Owiti & others v Anthony Oluoch t/a A. T Oluoch and Company Advocates & 2 others [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Ochieng Owiti and Others vs. Anthony Oluoch T/A A.T Oluoch and Company Advocates and Others
- Case Number: Cause No. 561 of 2014
- Court: Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Date Delivered: 16th October 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Hon. Lady Justice Maureen Onyango
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues before the court included:
- Whether the consent order recorded on 15th December 2015 should be reviewed.
- Whether the 1st and 2nd Respondents were rightfully joined in the suit.
- Whether the firm of Mbuthia Kinyanjui was properly on record.
- Whether the court had jurisdiction to determine the application.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Applicants, Ochieng Owiti and others, were former employees of Telkom Kenya Limited who were retrenched in June 2006. They filed a motion seeking to review a consent order that had been entered into by their representatives and the Respondents, which stipulated a settlement of Kshs. 500 million plus legal costs. The Applicants contended that they were not consulted regarding this settlement and argued that the amount was unconscionably low compared to settlements reached in similar cases. They claimed that the consent was obtained fraudulently without their knowledge or consent.

4. Procedural History:
The case began as HCCC No. 273 of 2011 and was consolidated with other cases, leading to Cause No. 561 of 2014. A consent order was recorded in December 2015, which the Applicants later sought to review in May 2019. The Respondents opposed the application, arguing that the Applicants were not entitled to relief as they had already received payment and signed discharge vouchers.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, particularly Rule 33 regarding review of consent orders, which may only be set aside on grounds such as fraud or collusion.
- Case Law: The court referenced several cases, including Flora Wasike v Destimo Wamboko, which established that a consent judgment has contractual effect and can only be set aside on grounds justifying the annulment of a contract. The court also noted the principle from the case of Hirani v Kassam that consent orders are not easily varied or set aside.
- Application: The court concluded that the Applicants failed to prove that the consent order was obtained through fraud or without proper authority. The court found that the Applicants had received the settlement and had not demonstrated any legal grounds to warrant a review of the consent order.

6. Conclusion:
The court dismissed the application for review of the consent order, determining that the Applicants had not met the required threshold for such an action. The court emphasized the importance of finality in consent judgments and the necessity for parties to adhere to their contractual obligations.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the ruling.

8. Summary:
The ruling in Ochieng Owiti and Others vs. Anthony Oluoch T/A A.T Oluoch and Company Advocates and Others upheld the validity of the consent order entered in December 2015, denying the Applicants' request for review. The case highlights the binding nature of consent judgments in civil proceedings and underscores the necessity for parties to be vigilant in their representations and agreements. The court's decision reinforces the principle that consent orders can only be set aside under specific, substantiated circumstances.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Ochieng-Owiti--others-v-Anthony-Oluoch-t-a-A-T-Oluoch-and-Company-Advocates--2-others-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2116_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries