[2020] KEELRC 1328 (KLR)

[2020] KEELRC 1328 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant was indeed an employee of the respondent, as confirmed by the respondent's own witness. The claimant was placed on compulsory leave twice without any investigation or disciplinary process, and was ultimately advised that his position had been filled by another employee. There was no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELRC 1328 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Dalmas Ouma Gor; Respondent: Yalfa Cargo Handlers Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 173 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Claim partly allowed; termination declared unfair; compensation and notice pay awarded; other claims dismissed.
Judges
J Rika
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Compulsory Leave, Notice Pay, Annual Leave Entitlement, Service Pay, Employment Relationship
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Compulsory Leave Notice Pay Annual Leave Entitlement Service Pay Employment Relationship

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dalmas Ouma Gor

Claimant

Yalfa Cargo Handlers Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was an employee of the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the termination of the claimant's employment was unfair.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation, notice pay, annual leave, and service pay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant was indeed an employee of the respondent, as confirmed by the respondent's own witness. The claimant was placed on compulsory leave twice without any investigation or disciplinary process, and was ultimately advised that his position had been filled by another employee. There was no valid reason or fair procedure followed in the termination of the claimant's employment. The respondent's denial of the employment relationship was contradicted by its own evidence. The court concluded that the termination was unfair, and the claimant was entitled to compensation for unfair termination and notice pay. However, the claim for accrued leave was rejected due to...

Court Disposition

Claim partly allowed; termination declared unfair; compensation and notice pay awarded; other claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Termination was unfair.
  • Respondent to pay claimant Kshs. 105,000 as compensation for unfair termination and Kshs. 15,000 as notice pay, totaling Kshs. 120,000.