[2015] KEELRC 1214 (KLR)
The court found that the claimants' right to occupy the housing was contingent upon their employment status. Once their employment was terminated, their legal entitlement to remain in the employer-provided housing ceased. While the Constitution guarantees the right to housing and human dignity, this right does not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEELRC 1214 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Benard Mukolwe & 123 others; Respondent: Karuturi Limited (in receivership); Respondent: Karuturi Ltd; Respondent: Twiga Flowers Ltd
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 329 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Claim / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Termination of Employment, Employee Housing, Injunctive Relief, Right to Housing
- 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
Benard Mukolwe & 123 others
Applicant
Karuturi Limited (in receivership)
Respondent
Karuturi Ltd
Respondent
Twiga Flowers Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Claim / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimants are entitled to a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from evicting them from employment-provided housing after termination of employment.
- 2 Whether the right to housing can be enforced against private parties in the absence of consent or legal basis.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimants' right to occupy the housing was contingent upon their employment status. Once their employment was terminated, their legal entitlement to remain in the employer-provided housing ceased. While the Constitution guarantees the right to housing and human dignity, this right does not obligate private entities to provide housing in the absence of a legal or contractual basis. The court held that granting the injunction would unjustifiably burden the respondents and infringe on their property rights. Consequently, the application for a temporary injunction was dismissed, with costs to be in the cause.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The claimants' application for a temporary injunction is dismissed.
- Costs to be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAKURU
BENARD MUKOLWE & 123. ...............................................CLAIMANTS
KARUTURI LIMITED (in receivership)....................1st RESPONDENT
Karuturi Ltd)...............................2nd RESPONDENT
Karuturi Ltd)................................3rd RESPONDENT
TWIGA FLOWERS LTD................5th RESPONDENT
On 13 February 2015, the Court delivered a ruling in which the Claimants’ application seeking a temporary injunction against the Respondents from evicting them from the housing accommodation provided to them on account of their employment was dismissed on the basis that the employment had been terminated.
The Court directed that the application be served for inter partes hearing on 10 March 2015. The motion was served upon the Respondents and an affidavit of service deposing as to the service was filed in Court on 9 March 2015.
Mr. Muthanwa urged the Claimants’ case and he submitted that he was relying on the grounds on the face of the motion and the supporting affidavit of Benard Mukolwe.
The Court reserved ruling to 27 March 2015.
This affects or will adversely affect the operations of the Respondents and their constitutional right to property. On the other hand, every human being has a right to human dignity and housing (but the right to housing should not be borne by private citizens without their consent or legal basis).
The motion is therefore dismissed with an order that costs be in the cause.
Radido Stephen
Appearances
For Respondents Hamilton Harrison & Matthews Advocates (did not appear at hearing of application)