[2025] KEELRC 2079 (KLR)

[2025] KEELRC 2079 (KLR)

The court found that the trial magistrate erred in failing to certify the appellant's applications as urgent, given the risk of dissipation of funds and the clear evidence of overpayment. However, the substantive claims for refund were determined based on the test suit, where it was established that the 1st...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEELRC 2079 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Eldotec Consultancy Services Ltd; Respondent: Yvette Sally Adhiambo; Respondent: Stima DT Sacco Society Ltd; Respondent: Grace Wambui Maina; Respondent: Kimberly Birech; Respondent: The Co-operative Bank Kenya Ltd; Respondent: Milka Anyango Otieno
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E017 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Employment and Labour Relations Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part; judgment entered against 1st respondents for overpaid sums; claims against 2nd respondents dismissed with costs to be paid by 1st respondents; suits compromised and terminated.
Judges
MA Onyango
Legal Topics
Terminal Dues, Erroneous Payment, Recovery of Overpayment, Pecuniary Jurisdiction, Interim Injunctions
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Terminal Dues Erroneous Payment Recovery of Overpayment Pecuniary Jurisdiction Interim Injunctions

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eldotec Consultancy Services Ltd

Appellant

Yvette Sally Adhiambo

Respondent

Stima DT Sacco Society Ltd

Respondent

Grace Wambui Maina

Respondent

Kimberly Birech

Respondent

The Co-operative Bank Kenya Ltd

Respondent

Milka Anyango Otieno

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment and Labour Relations Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in declining to certify the appellant's applications as urgent.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was entitled to interim orders pending hearing of the applications.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant is entitled to recover sums erroneously paid to the respondents as terminal dues.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial magistrate erred in failing to certify the appellant's applications as urgent, given the risk of dissipation of funds and the clear evidence of overpayment. However, the substantive claims for refund were determined based on the test suit, where it was established that the 1st respondents had received and utilized excess terminal dues, making them liable to refund the appellant. The 2nd respondents (financial institutions) were not liable as they no longer held the funds at the time of service of freezing orders. The court adopted the findings of the test suit and entered judgment against the 1st respondents for the specific sums overpaid, dismissing the...

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part; judgment entered against 1st respondents for overpaid sums; claims against 2nd respondents dismissed with costs to be paid by 1st respondents; suits compromised and terminated.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the appellant against Yvette Sally Adhiambo in the sum of KES 436070.56.
  • Case against Stima DT Sacco Society Ltd in E074/2023 dismissed with costs to be paid by Yvette Sally Adhiambo.