[2022] KEELRC 13114 (KLR)

[2022] KEELRC 13114 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements under section 40 of the Employment Act, 2007, by not notifying the union and the Labour Officer of the intended redundancy, not issuing the required one-month notice to the affected employees, and not applying fair...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELRC 13114 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers; Respondent: Rumukia Farmers Cooperative Society Ltd
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause E005 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed. Termination of the 36 grievants declared wrongful, unfair, and unlawful. Reliefs granted as per the judgment.
Judges
DKN Marete
Legal Topics
Redundancy Procedure, Unfair Termination, Collective Bargaining Agreement, Notice Requirements, Compensation for Termination
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Redundancy Procedure Unfair Termination Collective Bargaining Agreement Notice Requirements Compensation for Termination

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers

Applicant

Rumukia Farmers Cooperative Society Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the termination of employment of the 36 grievants was wrongful, unfair and unlawful.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought.
  3. 3 Who bears the costs of the cause.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements under section 40 of the Employment Act, 2007, by not notifying the union and the Labour Officer of the intended redundancy, not issuing the required one-month notice to the affected employees, and not applying fair selection criteria such as 'last in, first out.' The respondent also disregarded the ongoing conciliation process and the terms of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. The respondent did not provide any evidence to justify the redundancy process or to rebut the claimant's case. As a result, the court held that the termination of the 36 grievants was wrongful, unfair, and unlawful,...

Court Disposition

Claim allowed. Termination of the 36 grievants declared wrongful, unfair, and unlawful. Reliefs granted as per the judgment.

Orders

  • Respondent to pay the 36 grievants notice pay, service gratuity, compensation for unlawful redundancy, and other terminal dues as specified in the judgment, totaling KES 21,836,515.00.
  • Respondent to bear the costs of the claim.