[2019] KEELRC 1275 (KLR)
The court found that the Claimant's termination was unfair as there was no valid reason provided and no disciplinary hearing was conducted. The Claimant was only given one day's notice, which was inadequate and contrary to statutory requirements. The court adopted its reasoning from a similar case involving the same...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELRC 1275 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Andrew Juma Odhiambo; Respondent: Rajesh Kapoor Shah t/a 7 to 7 Company Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Malindi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 21 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- Judgment for the Claimant.
- Judges
- J Rika
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Termination, Compensation for Dismissal, Notice Pay, Annual Leave Entitlement
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Andrew Juma Odhiambo
Claimant
Rajesh Kapoor Shah t/a 7 to 7 Company Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the termination of the Claimant's employment was unfair.
- 2 Whether the Claimant is entitled to compensation for unfair termination, notice pay, and annual leave balance.
- 3 Whether the Claimant is entitled to a certificate of service, costs, and interest.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Claimant's termination was unfair as there was no valid reason provided and no disciplinary hearing was conducted. The Claimant was only given one day's notice, which was inadequate and contrary to statutory requirements. The court adopted its reasoning from a similar case involving the same Respondent, holding that the Claimant was entitled to compensation for unfair termination, payment in lieu of notice, and balance of annual leave. Claims for severance pay, overtime, and legal fees were dismissed as unfounded. The court awarded the Claimant compensation equivalent to seven months' salary, one month salary in lieu of notice, and the balance of annual leave,...
Court Disposition
Judgment for the Claimant.
Orders
- Termination was unfair.
- Respondent to pay Claimant Kshs. 154,000 as compensation for unfair termination (7 months' salary).
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
35 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR
RELATIONS COURT AT MALINDI
CAUSE NUMBER 21 OF 2018
[Formerly Cause Number 876 of 2016 at E&LRC Mombasa]
BETWEEN
ANDREW JUMA ODHIAMBO..............................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
RAJESH KAPOOR SHAH t/a
7 TO 7 COMPANY LIMITED...........................................RESPONDENT
Rika J
Court Assistant: Benjamin Kombe
___________________________
Mogaka Bwongaki & Company Advocates for the Claimant
Chepkwony & Associates, Advocates for the Respondent
______________________________________________
JUDGMENT
1. In Malindi E&LRC Cause Number 20 of 2018, Enock N. Mongeri v. Rajesh Kapoor t/a 7 to 7 Company Limited,the Claimant was employed by the Respondent, at the Respondent’s supermarket in Malindi, as a Shop Attendant.
2. In the instant Claim, the Claimant was a Colleague of Claimant in the above Cause, at Respondent’s supermarket.
3. Both Claimants had their contracts terminated in similar circumstances. Similar facts are involved, and the Claimants were Witnesses for each other, in their respective Claims. The Claims were heard on the same date. The files’ history is similar. The only significant variation in the Claimants’ evidence’, is that the Claimant herein Andrew Juma Odhiambo, earned a higher monthly salary of Kshs. 22,000, as pleaded at paragraph 3 of his Statement of Claim, and served for a longer period of 7 years. It is noted also that Odhiambo was notified about termination on 29th July 2016. The effective date was 31st July 2016. He only had notice of 1 day. Lastly, whereas Odhiambo prays for 53 days of annual leave, he concedes to have received Kshs. 30,000 in annual leave pay.
4. The Court shall therefore adopt its findings and reasoning in Cause Number 20 of 2018, in determining the instant Claim. It was held by the Court inter alia, that: -
a) There was no valid reason, or reasons to justify termination.
b) There was no disciplinary hearing in any form.
c) The claims for severance pay, overtime and legal fees were not well-founded.
d) The Claimant was awarded compensation, balance of notice, annual leave, certificate of service, costs and interest.
5. There shall be Judgment in favour of the Claimant herein, in terms given at paragraph 4 [d] of this Judgment, subject to such variation as is necessary.
IN SUM, IT IS ORDERED:-
a) Termination was unfair.
b) The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant: equivalent of 7 months’ salary in compensation for unfair termination at Kshs. 154,000; 1 month salary in lieu of notice at Kshs. 22,000; and balance of annual leave at Kshs. 14,846 – total Kshs. 190,846.
c) Certificate of Service to issue.
d) Costs to the Claimant.
e) Interest allowed at 14% per annum from the date of Judgment till payment is made in full.
Dated and delivered at Malindi, this 28th day of June 2019.
James Rika
Judge