[2018] KEELRC 1619 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 1619 (KLR)

The court found that although clause 8 of the claimant's employment contract appeared unequivocal regarding severance pay, the respondent had raised serious allegations of deceit or fraud concerning its validity. Such allegations, if substantiated, could vitiate the contract. The court held that these issues could...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 1619 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Alexander Irungu Wanjiru; Respondent: The Registered Trustees of The Sisters of Mercy
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 211 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Severance Pay Pending Main Claim
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
DI Wasike
Legal Topics
Severance Pay, Employment Contracts, Summary Judgment, Fraud Allegations
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Severance Pay Employment Contracts Summary Judgment Fraud Allegations

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Irungu Wanjiru

Applicant

The Registered Trustees of The Sisters of Mercy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Severance Pay Pending Main Claim

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to severance pay pending the hearing and determination of the main claim.
  2. 2 Whether clause 8 of the employment contract is valid in light of allegations of deceit or fraud.
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment can be granted where there are serious allegations of fraud and conflicting affidavit evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although clause 8 of the claimant's employment contract appeared unequivocal regarding severance pay, the respondent had raised serious allegations of deceit or fraud concerning its validity. Such allegations, if substantiated, could vitiate the contract. The court held that these issues could not be resolved through affidavit evidence in an interlocutory application but required a full trial with oral evidence and cross-examination. Therefore, the application for severance pay pending the main claim was dismissed to allow the substantive issues to be determined at trial.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application dated 8th March, 2017 is dismissed with costs.