[2018] KEELRC 1223 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 1223 (KLR)

The court found that both the 1st and 2nd Respondents exercised control, paid remuneration, and managed the 2nd to 24th Petitioners, establishing an employer-employee relationship. The purported termination of the petitioners' employment was effected without valid reason, notice, or adherence to fair procedure as...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 1223 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya National Farmers Federation (KENAFF) (suing through its Registered Officials: Hon. Nduati Kariuki, Prof Kaburu M’Ribu, Grace Ngambi) and 23 others; Respondent: Humanist Institute for Co-operation with Developing Countries (HIVOS); Respondent: SNV Netherlands Development Organization in Kenya
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 27 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
Petition allowed. Judgment entered for the 2nd to 24th Petitioners against the 1st and 2nd Respondents jointly and severally.
Judges
MN Nduma, DO Ogal
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Constructive Dismissal, Employer Employee Relationship, Compensation for Dismissal, Notice Pay, Employment Contracts
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Constructive Dismissal Employer Employee Relationship Compensation for Dismissal Notice Pay Employment Contracts

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 47
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya National Farmers Federation (KENAFF) (suing through its Registered Officials: Hon. Nduati Kariuki, Prof Kaburu M’Ribu, Grace Ngambi) and 23 others

Applicant

Humanist Institute for Co-operation with Developing Countries (HIVOS)

Respondent

SNV Netherlands Development Organization in Kenya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction over the employment dispute between the petitioners and respondents.
  2. 2 Who between the 1st and 2nd Respondent is liable for the claims made by the petitioners.
  3. 3 What remedies are available to the petitioners for the alleged unfair termination and withheld emoluments.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both the 1st and 2nd Respondents exercised control, paid remuneration, and managed the 2nd to 24th Petitioners, establishing an employer-employee relationship. The purported termination of the petitioners' employment was effected without valid reason, notice, or adherence to fair procedure as required by the Employment Act and the Constitution. The respondents' actions constituted unfair labour practices and violated the petitioners' rights under Article 41 of the Constitution and sections 36, 41, 43, and 45 of the Employment Act. The court held both respondents jointly and severally liable for the unlawful and unfair termination, awarding five months' salary as...

Court Disposition

Petition allowed. Judgment entered for the 2nd to 24th Petitioners against the 1st and 2nd Respondents jointly and severally.

Orders

  • Each of the 2nd to 24th Petitioners is awarded five months' salary as compensation for unlawful and unfair termination.
  • Each of the 2nd to 24th Petitioners is awarded one month salary in lieu of notice.