[2018] KEELRC 2361 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 2361 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant's employment had not been terminated by the respondent and that he was expected to return to work. The court further held that any compensation for injuries suffered in the course of duty should be pursued under the Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007, and not through the present suit....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 2361 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Douglas James Mayabi; Respondent: MFI Technology Solutions Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 359 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
suit dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
MN Nduma, DO Ogal
Legal Topics
Termination of Employment, Work Injury Benefits, Cause of Action, Abuse of Court Process
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Termination of Employment Work Injury Benefits Cause of Action Abuse of Court Process

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Douglas James Mayabi

Claimant

MFI Technology Solutions Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's employment was terminated by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation for alleged injuries suffered in the course of duty.
  3. 3 Whether the suit discloses a cause of action against the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant's employment had not been terminated by the respondent and that he was expected to return to work. The court further held that any compensation for injuries suffered in the course of duty should be pursued under the Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007, and not through the present suit. As the suit disclosed no cause of action against the respondent and amounted to an abuse of the court process, it was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

suit dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The suit is dismissed with costs to the respondent.