At the onset of oral argument in this Court applicant raised a point in limine which respondents opposed.
“2. No authority to depose to affidavit on behalf of 2nd Respondent.
2.1 The deponent to Respondents; opposing affidavit has no legal authority to depose to same on behalf of 2nd respondent which in terms of section 3 of the Health Service Act (Chapter 15:16), is a corporate body. It is trite that authority to act for a corporate body is required before a natural person’s deposition is accepted.
3. Michael Sande says he is the Acting Secretary for the 2nd respondent... More
Applicant applied to this Court for condonation of a belated application to appeal this Court’s judgment LC/H/349/24 to the Supreme Court. Respondent opposed the application but was barred for failure to file its heads of argument. More
This is an urgent application for stay of execution of a decision made against the applicant by the respondent wherein the respondent demoted the applicant . The application is opposed. This is not the first time that the applicant has approached this Court with a similar application. In January 2024 the applicant appeared before this Court ( Honourable Musariri J). Judgment in that matter, LC/H/2/24 ,was issued on 15th January 2024.The Court in the earlier application dismissed it on the basis that the applicant failed to show that he would suffer irreparable damage should the demotion not be stayed pending... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Disciplinary Appeals Committee that upheld the decision of the Disciplinary Committee to dismiss the Appellant from employment after committing a number of misconducts. More
