[2018] KEELRC 2335 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 2335 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant had worked for the respondent as a security guard for approximately 10 years, being paid as a casual employee throughout. Under Section 37 of the Employment Act, this continuous service entitled him to be treated as a regular employee. The respondent failed to provide any evidence...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 2335 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Baret Burudi Boyo; Respondent: Owl Alarms [K] Ltd
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 567 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
claim partly allowed
Judges
J Rika
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Casual to Regular Conversion, Compensation for Dismissal, Annual Leave Entitlement
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Casual to Regular Conversion Compensation for Dismissal Annual Leave Entitlement

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Baret Burudi Boyo

Claimant

Owl Alarms [K] Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's termination was unfair and unlawful.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was entitled to be converted from casual to regular employment under Section 37 of the Employment Act.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation, notice pay, and annual leave pay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant had worked for the respondent as a security guard for approximately 10 years, being paid as a casual employee throughout. Under Section 37 of the Employment Act, this continuous service entitled him to be treated as a regular employee. The respondent failed to provide any evidence or justification for the termination, which was effected without notice and did not meet the standards of fairness required by Sections 41, 43, and 45 of the Employment Act. The court declared the termination unfair and awarded the claimant compensation equivalent to six months’ salary, one month’s salary in lieu of notice, and annual leave pay based on the statutory minimum....

Court Disposition

claim partly allowed

Orders

  • It is declared under Section 37(4) of the Employment Act 2007 that the claimant was entitled to regular employment and should have been treated as a regular employee.
  • It is declared termination was unfair.