[2017] KEELRC 811 (KLR)
The court found that the decree issued on 29th December 2015 did not accurately reflect the orders made in the award delivered on 22nd December 2004 by Honourable Murtaza Jaffer. The court emphasized that the award included specific entitlements under the CBA, such as outstanding wages, leave pay, allowances,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELRC 811 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Worker’s Union; Respondent: Kapa Oil Refineries
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1724 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Correct Decree
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Decree Correction, Collective Bargaining Agreement, Outstanding Wages, Gratuity, Compensation
- 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
Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Worker’s Union
Applicant
Kapa Oil Refineries
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Correct Decree
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the decree granted on 29th December 2015 in cause no. 25 of 2004 correctly reflected the court's award delivered on 22nd December 2004.
- 2 Whether the court should allow the correction of the decree to correspond with the original award.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the decree issued on 29th December 2015 did not accurately reflect the orders made in the award delivered on 22nd December 2004 by Honourable Murtaza Jaffer. The court emphasized that the award included specific entitlements under the CBA, such as outstanding wages, leave pay, allowances, notice, gratuity, and compensation, as well as directions for the Ministry of Labour to investigate compliance. Given the loss and subsequent reconstruction of the file, and the lack of satisfaction of the award, the court determined it was just and necessary to correct the decree to correspond strictly with the original award. The application for correction was therefore allowed,...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The Registrar is directed to re-draw a decree that strictly corresponds to the award delivered on 22nd December 2004.
- The Registrar is to keep this file in the strong room.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 1724 OF 2014
KENYA UNION OF COMMERCIAL FOOD AND ALLIEDWORKER’S UNION ....CLAIMANT
VERSUS
KAPA OIL REFINERIES…………..........…........................................................RESPONDENT
M/s Kilonzo for claimant/applicant
M/s Muumbi for respondent
RULING
1. The claimant/applicant filed a notice of motion application on 19th July 2016 seeking the court to correct the decree granted in cause no. 25 of 2004 on 29th December 2015 to correspond with the award of the court delivered on 22nd December 2004.
2. The file in this matter could not be traced for a long time and on 1st December 2014, Honourable Lady Justice Monica Mbaru ordered the reconstruction of the same. This explains the delay in bringing this application.
3. The court has perused the award of the court in cause no. 25 of 2004 by Honourable Murtaza Jaffer in which the final order of the court were for payment;
a. For outstanding wages, leave pay and allowances as provided for in the CBA between the parties;
b. In lieu of notice in accordance with clause 11 of the CBA.
c. Of gratuity in accordance with clause 26 of the CBA
d. Twelve (12) months’ wage by way of compensation.
4. The court further ordered;
e. Ministry of Labour to investigate compliance by the respondent with the labour laws/wages regulations as well as health and safety requirements in respect of casual employees employed either directly by the respondent or through sub-contractors or other agents. A report of the Ministry’s investigation be produced in court within 45 days.
f. All sums already paid by the respondent be taken into account in the process of implementation of this award by the parties.
5. The dispute was set down for mention on 9th February 2005. To date the award has not been satisfied for various reasons including loss of the original file.
6. The court is satisfied that the decree granted in cause no. 25 of 2004 on 29th December 2015 did not reflect correctly the orders of Honourable Murtaza J. in the award delivered on 22nd December 2004.
7. The court therefore allows this application and directs;
(a.) The Registrar, re-draw a decree that strictly corresponds to the award of the court delivered on 22nd December 2004 as captured in this ruling above.
(b.) The Registrar to keep this file in the strong room.
(c.) Costs to follow the outcome.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 21st Day of April 2017
MATHEWS NDERI NDUMA
PRINCIPAL JUDGE