[2022] KEELRC 268 (KLR)
The court held that the parties, by including a mediation and arbitration clause in their employment contract and expressly waiving their right to file a lawsuit in any civil court except for enforcement of an arbitration decision, have positively rejected the jurisdiction of the court. The dispute must therefore be...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELRC 268 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Arthur Aseka; Respondent: World Relief
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause E673 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- Claim struck out for want of jurisdiction.
- Judges
- J Rika
- Legal Topics
- Employment Contracts, Termination of Employment, Jurisdiction of Court, Arbitration Clauses
- 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
Arthur Aseka
Claimant
World Relief
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Employment and Labour Relations Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the claim in light of the arbitration clause in the employment contract.
- 2 Whether the parties are bound to resolve their dispute through mediation and arbitration as stipulated in their agreement.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the parties, by including a mediation and arbitration clause in their employment contract and expressly waiving their right to file a lawsuit in any civil court except for enforcement of an arbitration decision, have positively rejected the jurisdiction of the court. The dispute must therefore be resolved in accordance with the agreed private dispute resolution mechanism. The court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the claim, and it is not for the court to refer the matter to mediation or arbitration; that responsibility lies with the parties themselves.
Court Disposition
Claim struck out for want of jurisdiction.
Orders
- The court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the claim.
- The claim is struck out with no order on costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR
RELATIONS COURT AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NUMBER E673 OF 2020
BETWEEN
ARTHUR ASEKA ....................................... CLAIMANT
VERSUS
WORLD RELIEF..................................... RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The Claimant was employed by the Respondent, an International Organization with its head office in the USA, and a Branch Office in Nairobi.
2. He states that he was employed on 16th August 2019, as Area Coordinator, Bentiu in Juba, Southern Sudan.
3. His contract was terminated through the Respondent’s head office, on 23rd February 2020.
4. He states that termination was unfair and unlawful, and filed this Claim on 23rd October 2020, seeking compensation for unfair termination and terminal benefits.
5. The Respondent has filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection citing 5 grounds, why the Court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the Claim.
6. The Court does not think it necessary, to make a finding on 4 of those grounds, but shall focus on 1 ground, which is that the contract of employment concluded by the Parties, annexure 1 in the Claimant’s bundle of documents, contains a mediation and arbitration clause.
7. The clause reads as follows: -
‘’ Any claim or dispute arising from or related to this agreement shall be settled by mediation and, if necessary legally binding arbitration in accordance with the Rules of Procedure for Christian Conciliation of the Institute for Christian Conciliation, a division of Peacemakers Ministries [complete text of the Rules is available at www. Peacemakers. net]. Judgment upon an arbitration decision may be entered in any court otherwise having jurisdiction. The Parties understand that these methods shall be the sole remedy for any controversy or claim arising out of this agreement and expressly waive their right to file a lawsuit in any civil court against one another for such disputes, except to enforce an arbitration decision. ‘’
8. Parties have therefore positively rejected the jurisdiction of the Court, opted for a private dispute resolution mechanism, and there is no reason at all, why the Claim was filed in Court. They expressly waived their right to file lawsuit. The dispute should be dealt with in accordance with the above clause. It is not for the Court to make reference to mediation or arbitration. That is the role of the Parties, having positively rejected the jurisdiction of the Court, save on enforcement of any arbitration decision. The Court declines jurisdiction.
IT IS ORDERED: -
a. The Court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the Claim.
b. The Claim is struck out with no order on the costs.
DATED, SIGNED AND RELEASED TO THE PARTIES ELECTRONICALLY AT CHAKA, UNDER THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND JUDICIARY COVID-19 GUIDELINES, THIS 22ND DAY OF APRIL 2022.
JAMES RIKA
JUDGE