[2023] KEELRC 701 (KLR)

[2023] KEELRC 701 (KLR)

The court found that at the time the claimant incurred the medical expenses and submitted the claim, he was still an employee and had not yet been placed on unauthorised leave. The respondent's subsequent imposition of unauthorised leave could not retroactively disqualify the claimant from benefits already accrued...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELRC 701 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Frank Esevwe; Respondent: University of Nairobi
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1090 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the claimant
Judges
B Ongaya
Legal Topics
Employee Medical Benefits, Contractual Entitlements, Unfair Labour Practices
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Employee Medical Benefits Contractual Entitlements Unfair Labour Practices

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frank Esevwe

Claimant

University of Nairobi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was justified in refusing to refund the claimant's medical expenses under the contract of service.
  2. 2 Whether the imposition of unauthorised leave could lawfully bar the claimant's entitlement to medical benefits.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's conduct amounted to discrimination and unfair treatment in breach of employment rights.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that at the time the claimant incurred the medical expenses and submitted the claim, he was still an employee and had not yet been placed on unauthorised leave. The respondent's subsequent imposition of unauthorised leave could not retroactively disqualify the claimant from benefits already accrued and duly approved under the contract of service. The respondent's refusal to process the refund was unwarranted, discriminatory, and unfair, as it denied the claimant an entitlement that other employees in similar circumstances would have enjoyed. The court awarded the special damages claimed and declared the respondent's conduct unlawful.

Court Disposition

judgment for the claimant

Orders

  • Payment of Kshs 126,620.00 by May 2, 2023, failing which interest to be payable at court rates from the date of filing until full payment.
  • Declaration that the respondent's refusal to process the claimant's refund is unwarranted, discriminatory, and unfair.