[2018] KEELRC 1024 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 1024 (KLR)

The court found that although the parties engaged in conciliation and the claimant received payment for certain claims, the claimant was dissatisfied as not all claims—specifically unfair termination and underpayment—were addressed in the conciliation process. The court held that a claimant who is dissatisfied with...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 1024 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Alex Lutungu Mutange; Respondent: Kanini Haraka Enterprises Ltd
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 119 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit
Outcome
Application to strike out the suit declined. Costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
Conciliation Process, Unfair Termination, Underpayment Claims, Court Jurisdiction
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Conciliation Process Unfair Termination Underpayment Claims Court Jurisdiction

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alex Lutungu Mutange

Claimant

Kanini Haraka Enterprises Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be struck out on grounds that the matter was settled through conciliation.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is abusing the court process by maintaining the suit after conciliation.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to pursue claims not addressed in the conciliation process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the parties engaged in conciliation and the claimant received payment for certain claims, the claimant was dissatisfied as not all claims—specifically unfair termination and underpayment—were addressed in the conciliation process. The court held that a claimant who is dissatisfied with the outcome of conciliation cannot be barred from accessing the court to seek redress for unresolved issues. The court had already issued directions for the matter to proceed to hearing after noting the lack of full agreement on the conciliator's recommendations. The respondent's compliance with filing a defence further indicated that the matter was to be heard on its merits....

Court Disposition

Application to strike out the suit declined. Costs in the cause.

Orders

  • The application dated 2nd July, 2018 is declined.
  • Costs shall be in the cause.