[2022] KEELRC 14637 (KLR)
The court found that its original judgment was clear and unambiguous: the sums awarded to the claimant were for unpaid house allowance, unpaid salaries for March to October 2015, and unpaid leave for 15 days. The pay cuts were consensual and did not constitute constructive dismissal. The respondent's application for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELRC 14637 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Abigael Jane Ayako; Respondent: Masai Mara Sopa Lodge Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1251 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Clarification Application / Ruling on Post Judgment Application
- Outcome
- Application for clarification dismissed; respondent to pay claimant KES 455,000, costs of the motion, and interest at court rates from June 6, 2022 until payment in full.
- Judges
- Nzioki wa Makau
- Legal Topics
- Unpaid Salaries, House Allowance, Leave Entitlement, Pay Cuts, Constructive Dismissal
- 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
Abigael Jane Ayako
Applicant
Masai Mara Sopa Lodge Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Clarification Application / Ruling on Post Judgment Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the judgment was ambiguous regarding the legitimacy of the pay cut and the sums awarded to the claimant.
- 2 Whether the respondent is entitled to clarification of the judgment regarding the sums payable.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that its original judgment was clear and unambiguous: the sums awarded to the claimant were for unpaid house allowance, unpaid salaries for March to October 2015, and unpaid leave for 15 days. The pay cuts were consensual and did not constitute constructive dismissal. The respondent's application for clarification was unnecessary, as the judgment was written in plain English and required no further explanation. The respondent is liable to pay the claimant KES 455,000, after deducting the sums awarded to the respondent on its counterclaim. The respondent is also ordered to pay the costs of this motion and interest at court rates on the unpaid sum from June 6, 2022 until...
Court Disposition
Application for clarification dismissed; respondent to pay claimant KES 455,000, costs of the motion, and interest at court rates from June 6, 2022 until payment in full.
Orders
- Respondent to pay claimant KES 455,000 after deducting counterclaim sums.
- Respondent to pay costs of this motion.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
Ayako v Masai Mara Sopa Lodge Limited (Cause 1251 of 2017) [2022] KEELRC 14637 (KLR) (13 December 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELRC 14637 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Cause 1251 of 2017
Nzioki wa Makau, J
December 13, 2022
Between
Abigael Jane Ayako
Claimant
and
Masai Mara Sopa Lodge Limited
Respondent
Ruling
1. The motion before me is the respondent’s notice of motion application seeking a clarification of the judgment of the court. The respondent has misconstrued a sentence in the judgment to suggest that the pay cut was legitimate as to allow the claimant forego the sum awarded in the judgment. The court wishes to point out that the amount awarded was for unpaid house allowance for 9½ months, unpaid salaries for the months of March to October 2015 and unpaid leave for 15 days. The judgment was in plain english and the respondent should not pretend to understand it. But just in case English is not a language the respondent understands well, i reiterate that the pay cuts were in a sense consensual meaning the claimant would not found a cause for constructive dismissal. For ease of understanding what that means, the Court refers the Respondent to paragraph 7 of the decision for it to understand what constructive dismissal is since that is defined there. In case of any doubt the Respondent may seek a lawyer’s assistance in reading the Judgment if this is not clear. The total the Respondent is to pay to the claimant is kshs 455,000/- having deducted the sums the claimant was to pay to the respondent on its counterclaim which succeeded. As the application was unnecessary since there is no ambiguity in the judgment, the court will mulct the respondent in costs of this motion as well interest at court rates on the unpaid sum from June 6, 2022 till payment in full.
It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022NZIOKI WA MAKAUJUDGE