[2019] KEELRC 590 (KLR)
The court found that the claimant and respondent were in a contract of service, but the claimant's employment was terminated for misconduct, including failure to report back to work on the assigned date after suspension. The court determined that the claimant substantially contributed to her termination by resuming...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELRC 590 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Christabel Achieng Abuto; Respondent: Change A Life Learning Centre
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 2309 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- claim dismissed with costs to the respondent
- Judges
- B Ongaya
- Legal Topics
- Unlawful Termination, Employment Contracts, Notice Pay, Leave Entitlements, Nssf Contributions
- 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
Christabel Achieng Abuto
Claimant
Change A Life Learning Centre
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant was unlawfully terminated from employment.
- 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to terminal benefits and dues as prayed.
- 3 Whether the respondent breached the Employment Act, 2007.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimant and respondent were in a contract of service, but the claimant's employment was terminated for misconduct, including failure to report back to work on the assigned date after suspension. The court determined that the claimant substantially contributed to her termination by resuming duty belatedly. The claims for notice pay, house allowance, leave, NSSF, and service pay were dismissed for lack of contractual or statutory basis or justification. The court concluded that the claimant was not entitled to the remedies sought and dismissed the suit with costs to the respondent.
Court Disposition
claim dismissed with costs to the respondent
Orders
- The suit is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
40 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 2309 OF 2016
CHRISTABEL ACHIENG ABUTO..............................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
CHANGE A LIFE LEARNING CENTRE.............RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 25th October, 2019)
JUDGMENT
The claimant filed the memorandum of claim on 15. 11. 2016 through Ochieng, Kokul & Velo Advocates. The claimant prayed for judgment against the respondent for:
a) A declaration that continued withholding, failing, refusal and neglecting to pay the claimant his rightful benefits and other terminal dues unlawful and untenable.
b) The respondent breached the Employment Act, 2007 and other labour laws.
c) The respondent to pay the claimant his salaries earned but not paid, house allowance, and leave days earned but not given or paid for.
d) As a result the Court to order the respondent to pay the claimant terminal benefits and unpaid dues including:
i. 3 months’ notice in lieu of termination notice Kshs. 15, 000 x3 =Kshs. 45, 000. 00.
ii. 6 months house allowance Kshs. 10% x15, 000 x 6 =Kshs.9, 000. 00.
iii. Leave allowance 13/26 x 15, 000 = Kshs. 7, 500. 00
iv. NSSF Kshs. 11, 250. 00.
v. Service for 6 months Kshs.50, 000. 00.
vi. Total claim Kshs. 122, 750. 00.
The respondent filed on 20. 12. 2016 the response to claim through Murage Juma & Company Advocates. The respondent prayed that the claim be dismissed with costs.
To answer the 1st issue for determination the Court returns that the parties were in a contract of service. By the contract dated 29. 01. 2016 the respondent employed the claimant on a one year contract effective 29. 01. 2019 at a monthly salary of USD 150. The working hours were from 7am to 3pm. The claimant worked in the library.
To answer the 2nd issue for determination the Court returns that the claimant’s employment was terminated by the letter dated 23. 07. 2016 upon the following grounds:
a) Misconduct at work including the write-ups on 02. 03. 2016 and 14. 06. 2016.
b) Disobeying lawful directive from the administrator by refusing to surrender the library keys after suspension.
c) Engaging in verbal confrontation with one of the administrators.
d) A member of the claimant’s family making threatening calls to one of the administrators over the issues.
e) Disregard of protocol by directly conducting the CEO.
f) Failure to report back to work on Saturday 23. 07. 2016 at the end of the one week suspension.
The letter promised to honour her salary for July 2016 and she was to surrender the entire respondent’s property.
The claimant testified that on 16. 07. 2016 she reported at work but she was unwell. Collins Wade, an administrator, reproached her for looking dull and suspended her from duty for a week. The respondent’s letter dated 16. 07. 2016n shows that the claimant was suspended for chatting the whole time and being defensive and defiant in that regard. She was expected to resume duty on 23. 07. 2016 but by her own evidence she resumed on 25. 07. 2016. She resumed duty on 25. 07. 2016 and she was given the termination letter dated 23. 07. 2016. The Court finds that she substantially contributed to her termination when she resumed duty belatedly beyond the date assigned in the termination letter.
The 3rd issue for determination is whether the claimant is entitled to the remedies as prayed for. The Court makes findings as follows:
a) The prayer for 3 months’ pay in lieu of notice and house allowance lack contractual and statutory basis and will fail.
b) The prayer for leave will fail as leave had not accrued as per section 28 of the Employment Act, 2007.
c) If NSSF was not remitted then the same can be pursued in accordance with relevant statutory provisions. The claimant gave no justification for the prayer for NSSF and the same will fail.
d) The prayer for service pay of Kshs.50, 000. 00 was not justified and will fail.
In conclusion, judgment is hereby entered for the respondent against the claimant for dismissal of the suit with costs.
Signed, datedanddeliveredin court atNairobithisFriday, 25th October, 2019.
BYRAM ONGAYA
JUDGE