[2019] KEELRC 214 (KLR)
The court found that the claimant was employed on a fixed term contract which expired on 31st December 2014. The claimant worked for an additional month, for which he was paid, but there was no evidence of contract renewal or expectation of renewal. The letter of appointment did not specify a retirement age, and the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELRC 214 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Joseph Okello Owade; Respondent: Star Plastics Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1561 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- suit dismissed with costs
- Judges
- MN Nduma, DO Ogal
- Legal Topics
- Unlawful Termination, Fixed Term Contracts, Retirement Age, Contract Expiry
- 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
Joseph Okello Owade
Claimant
Star Plastics Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the termination of the claimant's employment was unlawful and unfair.
- 2 Whether expiry of a fixed term contract constitutes unfair dismissal.
- 3 Whether old age is a valid reason for termination in the absence of a stated retirement age in the contract.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimant was employed on a fixed term contract which expired on 31st December 2014. The claimant worked for an additional month, for which he was paid, but there was no evidence of contract renewal or expectation of renewal. The letter of appointment did not specify a retirement age, and the claimant did not provide evidence that he requested renewal. The court held that the employment relationship ended lawfully by effluxion of time, and the respondent's actions did not amount to unfair or unlawful dismissal. The claim for compensation for unlawful dismissal was therefore without merit.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed with costs
Orders
- The suit is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
36 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 1561 OF 2015
(Before Hon. Justice Mathews N. Nduma)
JOSEPH OKELLO OWADE............CLAIMANT
VERSUS
STAR PLASTICS LIMITED........RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. The suit was filed on 3rd September 2015 praying for maximum compensation for unlawful and unfair dismissal, interest and costs.
2. The claimant testified under oath that he was employed by the respondent on 1st August 2012 as an Electrician at a monthly salary of Kshs. 30,000.
3. That the claimant worked diligently until 2nd February 2015, when upon reporting to work he was handed a letter of termination dated the same date, the 2nd February 2015. The letter did not provide any reason for termination of employment however, the claimant testified that he was told that termination was due to his old age.
4. The claimant testified that the termination was unlawful and unfair in that he had done nothing wrong and had a good record of work. Claimant testified that old age was not a valid reason for termination of his employment without notice.
5. The respondent called RW1 Rusheshi F. Shah who testified that the claimant had worked for the respondent and had no disciplinary case. That the claimant worked for one month after his contract expired and then he was served a letter of termination. That his contract expired in December 2014 and it was not renewed. The respondent produced the letter of appointment for the period 1st January 2014 to 31st December 2014. RW1 prayed the suit be dismissed.
Determination
6. It is not in dispute the claimant was employed on a fixed term contract from 1st January 2014 up to 31st December 2014. It is also not in dispute that the employment of the claimant was terminated by a letter dated 2nd February 2015. At the time of the termination the claimant was not on any fixed term contract for at least one month. The respondent testified that the claimant served one month before his employment was terminated upon expiry of his contract and that the contract was not renewed.
7. The claimant testified that the termination of his employment was due to old age. The claimant did not tell the court at what age the termination of his employment occurred. The claimant testified that old age is not a valid reason for termination of employment.
8. It is true that the general retirement age of public servants is 60 years. A few sectors including judiciary and universities have retirement age ranging from 60 to 70 years.
9. Old age is a valid reason for retirement of employees from employment. The retirement age must be stated in the letter of appointment. It must be known to the employee in advance. The employee is entitled to at least one month notice to the date of retirement to allow him to prepare for the same.
10. The letter of appointment of the claimant did not have a date of retirement. However the claimant was employed on a fixed term contract that expired on 31st December 2014. The claimant did not provide any evidence that he had requested for renewal of the contract. RW1 testified that the claimant’s contract was not renewed but the respondent provided the claimant one month termination notice up to 2nd February 2015. RW1 testified that the termination was not for any disciplinary reason.
11. It is the court’s considered view and finding that the contract of employment of the claimant expired by effluxion of time. That the claimant served an extra one month during which he received an extra salary but this did not translate to a renewal of his employment contract.
12. The claimant provided no evidence that he had requested for renewal of his contract.
13. The court finds that the employment of the claimant having expired by effluxion of time was lawful and fair.
14. The respondent cannot be faulted for allowing the claimant to serve an extra month which was fully paid for.
15. The claimant was paid for all days worked and he has not claimed payment of any terminal benefits. The claim was for award of compensation for unlawful dismissal.
16. Accordingly, the suit lacks merit and is dismissed with costs.
Dated and Signed in Kisumu this 14th day of November, 2019
Mathews N. Nduma
Judge
Delivered and signed in Nairobi this 22nd day of November, 2019
Maureen Onyango
Judge
Appearances
Mr. Namada for Claimant
Mr. Gachoka for Respondent
Chrispo – Court Clerk