[2018] KEELRC 2525 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 2525 (KLR)

The court found that the claimants, having worked continuously for periods ranging from one and a half to five years and having received regular monthly payments with statutory deductions, were not casual employees but permanent and pensionable. The respondent failed to provide evidence to the contrary. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 2525 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Caroline Wairimu and 61 Others; Respondent: Emco Billets and Steel Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1127 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed in part for unfair dismissal.
Judges
HS Wasilwa
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Summary Dismissal, Casual Vs Permanent Status, Procedural Fairness, Remedies for Unlawful Dismissal, Statutory Deductions
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Summary Dismissal Casual Vs Permanent Status Procedural Fairness Remedies for Unlawful Dismissal Statutory Deductions

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

Parties

Caroline Wairimu and 61 Others

Claimant

Emco Billets and Steel Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants were casual or permanent employees.
  2. 2 Whether the claimants were dismissed or absconded duty.
  3. 3 Whether due process was followed in the termination of the claimants.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimants, having worked continuously for periods ranging from one and a half to five years and having received regular monthly payments with statutory deductions, were not casual employees but permanent and pensionable. The respondent failed to provide evidence to the contrary. The claimants were dismissed without notice or a hearing, in violation of Section 41 of the Employment Act. Notices allegedly posted by the respondent were not effectively served, and no disciplinary process was followed. The court held that the dismissal was unfair and unjustified, entitling the claimants to one month's salary in lieu of notice and six months' compensation for unfair...

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part for unfair dismissal.

Orders

  • Respondent to pay each claimant one month's salary in lieu of notice and six months' salary as compensation for unfair termination, as per Addendum 'A'.
  • Respondent to pay costs of the suit plus interest at court rates from the date of judgment.