[2017] KEELRC 1080 (KLR)
The court found that the claimant's employment history and terms were not materially in dispute. The claimant had written a letter requesting termination on medical grounds, which was received by management in the presence of the chief shop-steward. There was no evidence on record to support the claimant's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELRC 1080 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Dorcas Mueni Muli; Respondent: Kapric Apparels [EPZ] Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 608 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- claim dismissed
- Judges
- J Rika
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Termination, Constructive Dismissal, Medical Incapacity, Employee Resignation, Employment Contracts
- 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
Dorcas Mueni Muli
Claimant
Kapric Apparels [EPZ] Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant was unfairly terminated or coerced to resign on medical grounds.
- 2 Whether the respondent breached Sections 41, 45, and 47 of the Employment Act 2007.
- 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation and other terminal benefits.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimant's employment history and terms were not materially in dispute. The claimant had written a letter requesting termination on medical grounds, which was received by management in the presence of the chief shop-steward. There was no evidence on record to support the claimant's allegation of coercion, nor did she specify who allegedly coerced her. The court held that the burden of proof of coercion rested with the claimant, and she failed to discharge this burden. Consequently, the claim for unfair termination and related reliefs could not succeed.
Court Disposition
claim dismissed
Orders
- The claim is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
37 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR
RELATIONS COURT AT MOMBASA
CAUSE NUMBER 608 OF 2015
BETWEEN
DORCAS MUENI MULI ………………………….....……………. CLAIMANT
VERSUS
KAPRIC APPARELS [EPZ] LIMITED…………………….… RESPONDENT
Rika J
Court Assistant: Benjamin Kombe
Otieno Asewe & Company Advocates for the Claimant
Federation of Kenya Employers for the Respondent
__________________________________________
JUDGMENT
1. The Claimant filed her Statement of Claim on 14th August 2015. She states she was employed by the Respondent as a Mass Production Machinist, in the year 2010. Subsequently she was placed on short term contracts. The last commenced on 2nd January 2015. It was for 1 year, but was terminated prematurely on 30th April 2015 on medical grounds. Her salary as of the date of termination was Kshs. 13,525 monthly. She had been diagnosed with chronic anemia resulting from the nature of her work. On 11th May 2015, Dr. Anwar of Port Reitz Hospital recommended the Claimant is placed on light duty. The Respondent instead coerced the Claimant to resign, and paid her terminal benefits of Kshs. 27,141. She claims termination was unfair as it was in breach of Sections 41, 45 and 47 of the Employment Act 2007. She prays for Judgment against the Respondent for:-
a) 1 month salary in lieu of notice at Kshs. 13,525.
b) Salary for the unexpired period of 8 months at Kshs. 108,200.
c) Outstanding annual leave at Kshs. 13,004.
d) Gratuity at Kshs. 53,060.
e) 12 months’ salary in compensation for unfair termination at Kshs. 162,300
Total…. Kshs. 350, 0889
f) Declaration that termination was unfair and discriminatory.
g) General damages for discrimination.
h) Certificate of Service to issue.
i) Costs.
j) Interest.
k) Any other suitable relief.
2. The Respondent filed its Statement of Response on 17th September 2015. Its position is that the Claimant was employed by the Respondent from 1st March 2011. She requested for termination. She did so for medical reason. She was paid all her dues which she voluntarily accepted. The Respondent prays the Claim is dismissed with costs to the Respondent.
3. Parties agreed to have the dispute considered and resolved on the strength of the record. They confirmed filing of their Closing Submissions, on 14th December 2016 when date for delivery of Judgment was scheduled.
The Court Finds:-
4. The Claimant’s employment history and terms and conditions of service with the Respondent, are not materially in dispute.
5. On 30th April 2013, she wrote to the Respondent as follows:-
‘’As per attached medical report, I hereby request you to terminate my contract on medical grounds, as my condition has made me not perform my duties accordingly. It is hard for me to make this decision, but I have no option since my condition is not improving. I look forward to your assistance on the above request.’’
6. There is nothing on record to show the Claimant was coerced by anyone to write the above letter. She alleges she was coerced. She does not say by whom. The letter was received by Management in the presence of Chief Shop-steward. It is doubtful that the Workers’ elected Representative, could silently witness an Employee being forced to resign. It was for the Claimant to prove coercion. She did not and her Claim must consequently fail, without an order on costs.
Dated and delivered at Mombasa this 30th day of June 2017
James Rika
Judge