[2006] KEHC 1038 (KLR)

[2006] KEHC 1038 (KLR)

The court found that there was an error apparent on the record in its earlier order, as the terminal benefits were paid to the plaintiff only after the suit had been filed, not before. The defendant executed a general bank guarantee and made payment in March 2004, while the suit was filed in December 2003....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] KEHC 1038 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Emily Muthiani; Defendant: Gulf Air Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 1367 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Review
Outcome
application for review allowed; previous order reviewed and amended
Judges
JL Osiemo
Legal Topics
Wrongful Dismissal, Terminal Benefits, Costs Award, Interest on Judgment
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Wrongful Dismissal Terminal Benefits Costs Award Interest on Judgment

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

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

Parties

Emily Muthiani

Plaintiff

Gulf Air Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Review

  1. 1 Whether there was an error apparent on the record regarding the timing of payment of terminal benefits to the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to costs and interest despite prior payment of terminal benefits.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was an error apparent on the record in its earlier order, as the terminal benefits were paid to the plaintiff only after the suit had been filed, not before. The defendant executed a general bank guarantee and made payment in March 2004, while the suit was filed in December 2003. Therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to costs of the suit and interest from the date of filing to the date of payment. The previous order was reviewed and amended to reflect this correction.

Court Disposition

application for review allowed; previous order reviewed and amended

Orders

  • The order of 21st June 2005 is reviewed and amended to state that the defendant executed a general bank guarantee after the suit was filed.
  • The plaintiff is entitled to costs of the suit plus interest from the date of filing to the date of payment.