[2018] KEELRC 578 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 578 (KLR)

The court found that the Claimants' contracts were terminated without valid reason, notice, or hearing as required by the Employment Act, 2007. The Respondents failed to provide any justification or participate in the proceedings. The Claimants established their employment and the fact of termination. The court held...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 578 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Kenneth Kirigia Matiki; Claimant: Peter Hosea; Claimant: Julius Mwasingo; Claimant: Solomon Mkunde Ezekiel; Claimant: Sheila Lyona Ilamoya; Claimant: Edna Lagat; Claimant: Fredrick Temba; Claimant: Peter Nzioka Mkumbu; Claimant: Peter Auma Nyanchiri; Respondent: Insuale Africana Limited t/a Pangoni Beach Resort; Respondent: Pangoni Hotels & Resorts Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 512, 509 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; termination declared unfair; monetary reliefs granted as specified.
Judges
J Rika
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Terminal Benefits, Notice Pay, Compensation for Unfair Dismissal
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Terminal Benefits Notice Pay Compensation for Unfair 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenneth Kirigia Matiki

Claimant

Peter Hosea

Claimant

Julius Mwasingo

Claimant

Solomon Mkunde Ezekiel

Claimant

Sheila Lyona Ilamoya

Claimant

Edna Lagat

Claimant

Fredrick Temba

Claimant

Peter Nzioka Mkumbu

Claimant

Peter Auma Nyanchiri

Claimant

Insuale Africana Limited t/a Pangoni Beach Resort

Respondent

Pangoni Hotels & Resorts Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the Claimants' employment was unfair under the Employment Act.
  2. 2 Whether the Claimants are entitled to terminal dues including notice pay, house allowance, compensation, and unpaid salaries.
  3. 3 Whether the Claimants have proved entitlement to other reliefs such as NSSF dues, leave pay, overtime, severance pay, and general damages.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Claimants' contracts were terminated without valid reason, notice, or hearing as required by the Employment Act, 2007. The Respondents failed to provide any justification or participate in the proceedings. The Claimants established their employment and the fact of termination. The court held that the termination was unfair and that the Claimants were entitled to notice pay, house allowance, 12 months’ salary as compensation for unfair termination, and unpaid salaries. Prayers for NSSF dues, leave pay, leave travelling allowance, overtime, severance pay, cumulative off days, and general damages were declined due to lack of evidence or legal basis. Interest was...

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; termination declared unfair; monetary reliefs granted as specified.

Orders

  • It is declared termination was unfair.
  • Respondents to pay each Claimant notice pay, house allowance, 12 months’ salary in compensation for unfair termination, and unpaid salaries as detailed in the Statements of Claim.