[2019] KEELRC 1669 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 1669 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant was not a full-time regular employee as defined by the Employment Act, having worked only part of the day and being free to pursue other work. Consequently, he was not entitled to bring a claim for unlawful termination or to statutory benefits such as notice pay, leave pay, leave...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELRC 1669 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Joseph Charo Kitsao; Respondent: Maria Angelo De Fabians
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 14 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed
Judges
L Ndolo
Legal Topics
Casual Employment, Unlawful Termination, Employee Benefits, Burden of Proof
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Casual Employment Unlawful Termination Employee Benefits Burden of Proof

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Charo Kitsao

Claimant

Maria Angelo De Fabians

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was a full-time employee entitled to statutory benefits and protection against unlawful termination.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was unlawfully and unfairly terminated from employment.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to the claimed terminal dues and compensation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant was not a full-time regular employee as defined by the Employment Act, having worked only part of the day and being free to pursue other work. Consequently, he was not entitled to bring a claim for unlawful termination or to statutory benefits such as notice pay, leave pay, leave travelling allowance, or service pay. The claims for underpayment, off days, and public holidays were also dismissed for lack of proof. The entire claim was therefore dismissed, with each party bearing their own costs.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claimant's entire claim is dismissed.
  • Each party will bear their own costs.