Johnson Lisamula Murila v Presbyterian Church Hospital & another [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Judge Radido Stephen
Judgment Date
October 23, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
2
Explore the 2020 case summary of Johnson Lisamula Murila v Presbyterian Church Hospital & another on eKLR. Discover key legal insights and implications of this judgment.

Case Brief: Johnson Lisamula Murila v Presbyterian Church Hospital & another [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Johnson Lisamula Murila v. Presbyterian Church Hospital & Registered Trustees of the Presbyterian Church of East Africa
- Case Number: Cause No. 1695 of 2016 (Originally Nairobi Chief Magistrates Court Civil Case No. 7973 of 2010)
- Court: Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Date Delivered: 23rd October 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Judge Radido Stephen
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues before the court included whether the Memorandum of Claim filed by the Claimant should be struck out on the grounds that the original suit was a nullity due to lack of jurisdiction, and whether the matter was res judicata based on prior rulings.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Claimant, Johnson Lisamula Murila, initiated the case against the Respondents, Presbyterian Church Hospital and the Registered Trustees of the Presbyterian Church of East Africa. The dispute arose following the transfer of the case from the Chief Magistrates Court, where the suit had previously been struck out. The Respondents contended that there was no valid suit before the Employment and Labour Relations Court due to the previous striking out and the introduction of a new Respondent without proper procedure.

4. Procedural History:
The case began in the Chief Magistrates Court, where it was struck out on 2nd March 2012. The Claimant sought to amend the pleadings and transfer the case to the Employment and Labour Relations Court, which was eventually allowed. The Respondents filed a Motion on 2nd December 2019 to strike out the Claimant's Memorandum of Claim, arguing that the suit was a nullity and that the issues raised were res judicata, having been previously determined. The Claimant opposed this Motion, asserting that the earlier ruling did not strike out the entire suit but only a party.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered the Civil Procedure Rules, particularly Order 8(3)(4), which allows for amendments to correct party names and the principle of res judicata, which prevents the re-litigation of issues already decided by a competent court.
- Case Law: The court referenced the case of *Phoenix E.A. Assurance Company Ltd v. S.M. Thiga t/a Newspaper Service (2019) eKLR*, which emphasized that a claim filed in a court lacking jurisdiction is a nullity. Additionally, it cited *Daniel N Mugendi v. Kenyatta University & 3 Ors (2013) eKLR*, which discussed the transfer of cases to the appropriate court to ensure justice is served.
- Application: The court applied the rules and case law to conclude that the previous ruling did not invalidate the Claimant's entire suit but allowed for amendments. The court found that the issues raised by the Respondents had already been determined, thus rendering them res judicata. The court dismissed the Respondents' Motion, affirming its jurisdiction over the matter.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled against the Respondents' Motion to strike out the Claimant's Memorandum of Claim, concluding that the previous determination was res judicata and that the case had been properly transferred to its jurisdiction. This decision reaffirmed the Employment and Labour Relations Court's authority in employment-related disputes.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the ruling, as the decision was unanimous.

8. Summary:
The court dismissed the Respondents' application to strike out the Claimant's Memorandum of Claim, reinforcing the principle of res judicata and the court's jurisdiction over employment matters. This case highlights the importance of procedural correctness in civil litigation and the courts' role in ensuring that justice is served without undue procedural technicalities. The ruling has broader implications for future cases regarding jurisdiction and the amendment of pleadings within the Kenyan legal system.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Johnson-Lisamula-Murila-v-Presbyterian-Church-Hospital--another-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2395_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries