[2018] KEELRC 1004 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 1004 (KLR)

The court found that the conciliation agreement entered into between the claimant union and the respondent, which sought to deprive the grievants of gratuity benefits provided under clause 25 of the CBA, constituted an agreement to relinquish or vary a more favourable term to the detriment of the claimants. Such an...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 1004 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: James Mwiathi Kimandu; Respondent: Lauren International Flowers Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1396 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; conciliation agreement set aside to the extent it deprived grievants of gratuity; grievants entitled to redundancy and gratuity benefits under the CBA.
Judges
NJ Abuodha
Legal Topics
Collective Bargaining Agreement, Redundancy Benefits, Gratuity Entitlement
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Collective Bargaining Agreement Redundancy Benefits Gratuity Entitlement

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Mwiathi Kimandu

Applicant

Lauren International Flowers Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the conciliation agreement entered into on 7th June, 2012 violated clauses 22 and 25 of the CBA.
  2. 2 Whether the conciliation agreement could validly deprive the grievants of gratuity benefits under the CBA.
  3. 3 Whether the agreement to relinquish or vary more favourable terms in the CBA is null and void under the Employment Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the conciliation agreement entered into between the claimant union and the respondent, which sought to deprive the grievants of gratuity benefits provided under clause 25 of the CBA, constituted an agreement to relinquish or vary a more favourable term to the detriment of the claimants. Such an agreement is null and void to the extent that it contravenes the minimum terms and conditions of employment as set out in the Employment Act. Therefore, the court ordered that, in addition to redundancy benefits under clause 22 of the CBA, the grievants are entitled to payment of their clause 25 dues as provided in the CBA.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; conciliation agreement set aside to the extent it deprived grievants of gratuity; grievants entitled to redundancy and gratuity benefits under the CBA.

Orders

  • In addition to redundancy benefits under clause 22 of the CBA, the grievants be paid their clause 25 dues as provided in the CBA.