[2018] KEELRC 820 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 820 (KLR)

The court held that its judgment delivered on 20th January, 2017 was clear and unambiguous in directing the Respondent to convert all unionisable employees on fixed term contracts to permanent and pensionable terms. The court found no basis for further interpretation or clarification, as the operative part of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 820 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Shoe & Leather Workers Union; Respondent: Bata Shoe Company (K) Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 245 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Cause / Post Judgment Application for Interpretation
Outcome
Application for interpretation declined; judgment to be implemented as delivered.
Judges
MN Nduma, DO Ogal
Legal Topics
Conversion of Employment Terms, Fixed Term Contracts, Permanent and Pensionable Employment, Unionisable Employees
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Conversion of Employment Terms Fixed Term Contracts Permanent and Pensionable Employment Unionisable Employees

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Shoe & Leather Workers Union

Applicant

Bata Shoe Company (K) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Cause / Post Judgment Application for Interpretation

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to interpret its own judgment upon application by a party.
  2. 2 Whether the judgment delivered on 20th January, 2017 requires clarification regarding the conversion of fixed term contracts to permanent and pensionable terms.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that its judgment delivered on 20th January, 2017 was clear and unambiguous in directing the Respondent to convert all unionisable employees on fixed term contracts to permanent and pensionable terms. The court found no basis for further interpretation or clarification, as the operative part of the judgment was sufficiently explicit. The Respondent was directed to implement the judgment as delivered, and the Claimant was advised to seek appropriate remedies if the Respondent failed to comply. The court declined to entertain the Respondent's objection regarding jurisdiction, implicitly affirming its power to clarify its own orders where necessary, but found no ambiguity...

Court Disposition

Application for interpretation declined; judgment to be implemented as delivered.

Orders

  • The Respondent shall implement the judgment delivered on 20th January, 2017 as it stands.
  • Each party to bear its own costs of this reference.