[2014] KEELRC 442 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent failed to provide any valid reason or evidence for the termination of the claimant after 16 years of service. The dismissal was not based on a valid reason and did not follow the fair procedure required by law, specifically under Sections 41, 43, and 45 of the Employment Act,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEELRC 442 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: John Macharia Nyoike; Respondent: Thika Coffee Mills Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 894 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- claim allowed
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Termination, Procedural Fairness, Compensation for Dismissal, Terminal Benefits
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
John Macharia Nyoike
Claimant
Thika Coffee Mills Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the termination of the claimant's employment was unlawful and unfair within the meaning of the Employment Act.
- 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to terminal benefits and compensation for unfair dismissal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent failed to provide any valid reason or evidence for the termination of the claimant after 16 years of service. The dismissal was not based on a valid reason and did not follow the fair procedure required by law, specifically under Sections 41, 43, and 45 of the Employment Act, 2007. The claimant's evidence was uncontroverted, and the court concluded that the termination was both substantively and procedurally unfair. As a result, the claimant was entitled to unpaid salary, leave, notice pay, and compensation for unfair dismissal, amounting to a total award of Kshs.277,290 with interest and costs.
Court Disposition
claim allowed
Orders
- Respondent to pay claimant Kshs.16,146 as unpaid salary for 1st to 23rd January 2012.
- Respondent to pay claimant Kshs.21,762 as payment in lieu of leave.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
38 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 894 OF 2012
JOHN MACHARIA NYOIKE .............................. CLAIMANT
VERSUS
THIKA COFFEE MILLS LIMITED .................... RESPONDENT
Mr. Odongo for Claimant
M/s Hilda Kamau for Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Claimant was employed by the Respondent on 6th March and worked continuously for 16 years until termination of his employment on 23rd January 2012.
2. The letter of termination states:
“The management has reviewed your job performance and wish to inform you that your services are no longer required.”
3. The Claimant worked as an Artisan and earned a monthly salary of Kshs.21,762/= at the time of termination. The Claimant’s job performance was not reviewed nor was he prior to the termination warned that his performance was not good and / or was wanting.
The claimant states that the termination was unlawful and unfair within the meaning of Section 43 as read with Section 45 of the Employment Act.
4. The Claimant was not paid any terminal benefits upon termination and claims:
Unpaid salary for the period 1st to 23rd January 2012 in the sum of Kshs. 16,146/=;
Unpaid leave days in the sum of Kshs. 21,762/=;
Leave travel allowance in the sum of Kshs.2,400/=;
One month salary in lieu of notice in the sum of Kshs. 21,762 and
Maximum compensation in terms of Section 49(1)(c) of the Employment Act in the sum of Kshs.201,144/=.
The Claimant also prays for costs of the suit and interest and provision of certificate of service.
No valid reason has been provided for the dismissal of the Claimant.
Statement of Response
5. The Respondent in its Statement of Response dated 19th November 2012 does not provide the reason for the termination of the employment of the Claimant but only makes a bare denial that the termination was not unlawful and was done in accordance with a fair procedure.
6. The Respondent further did not tender any oral or documentary evidence to justify the dismissal of the Claimant after serving the Respondent for 16 years.
7. The Claimant testified in support of his case and confirmed the particulars of claim contained in the memorandum of claim. The same remains largely uncontroverted and the Claimant has on a balance of probability proved that the dismissal was not for a valid reason and was not done in terms of a fair procedure in contravention of Sections 41, 43and45 of the Employment Act, 2007.
8. Accordingly, the Court upholds the claim and grants the Claimant as follows:
unpaid salary for the period 1st to 23rd January 2012 in the sum Kshs.16,146/=;
payment in lieu of leave in the sum of Kshs.21,762/=;
one (1) month salary in lieu of leave in the sum of Kshs.21,762/=.
9. Due to the long service the Claimant had given the respondent. Taking into consideration the inconsiderate manner in which the dismissal was effected, without notice, without payment of any terminal benefits, without payment of any gratuity or any long service benefit and without any due process being followed, the Court awards the Claimant ten (10) months salary as compensation for the unlawful and unfair dismissal in the sum of Kshs.217,620/=.
10. Total award to the Claimant is Kshs.277,290/=.
The award is payable with interest at Court rates from the date of judgment to payment in full.
The Respondent is also to pay the costs of this suit.
Dated and Delivered at Nairobi this 30th day of May, 2014.
MATHEWS N. NDUMA
PRINCIPAL JUDGE