[2018] KEELRC 2145 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 2145 (KLR)

The court found that the Respondents failed to prosecute their defence or adduce evidence to rebut the Claimants' case. The burden of proof under section 45(2) of the Employment Act was not discharged by the Respondents, and the Claimants' evidence of termination without notice or terminal dues was unchallenged....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 2145 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Kazungu Katana Koi; Claimant: Shida Kaingu Kombe; Respondent: James Tsofa (Chairman), Katana Ngala (Assistant Chairman), Ellston Swida Konde, Ali Kiriba, Mariam Jabali (sued in their capacity as officials of Kuruwitu Conservation & Welfare Association)
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 520 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Claim partly allowed. Judgment for the Claimants for unfair termination.
Judges
AN Makau, L Ndolo
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Redundancy, Terminal Dues, Notice Pay, Compensation for Dismissal
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Redundancy Terminal Dues Notice Pay Compensation for Dismissal

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kazungu Katana Koi

Claimant

Shida Kaingu Kombe

Claimant

James Tsofa (Chairman), Katana Ngala (Assistant Chairman), Ellston Swida Konde, Ali Kiriba, Mariam Jabali (sued in their capacity as officials of Kuruwitu Conservation & Welfare Association)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Claimants deserted their employment or were unlawfully and unfairly terminated.
  2. 2 Whether the Claimants are entitled to the reliefs sought.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Respondents failed to prosecute their defence or adduce evidence to rebut the Claimants' case. The burden of proof under section 45(2) of the Employment Act was not discharged by the Respondents, and the Claimants' evidence of termination without notice or terminal dues was unchallenged. Consequently, the court held that the termination was unfair. The court awarded each Claimant one month's salary in lieu of notice and three months' compensation for unfair termination, considering the likelihood of the Claimants securing alternative employment. Claims for leave and gratuity were dismissed for lack of evidence.

Court Disposition

Claim partly allowed. Judgment for the Claimants for unfair termination.

Orders

  • Each Claimant is awarded Kshs.16,000 plus costs and interest.
  • Claims for leave and gratuity are dismissed.