[2023] KEELRC 3041 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent had provided an affidavit confirming payment of KES 2,310,653.13 to the claimant, which purportedly included all withheld payments and transport allowance for the interdiction period. However, as there remained outstanding issues in the main suit, the court directed the parties to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELRC 3041 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Ashford Mwiti Kirimi; Respondent: The Commissioner General, Kenya Revenue Authority
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Employment and Labour Relations Cause E237 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Employment and Labour Cause / Post Interlocutory Ruling; Directions for Hearing or Settlement
- Outcome
- Directions issued for parties to proceed with the main suit or negotiate settlement; compliance with previous payment order noted.
- Judges
- AN Mwaure
- Legal Topics
- Interdiction Payments, Transport Allowance, Salary Withholding, Court Directions, Out of Court Settlement
- 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
Ashford Mwiti Kirimi
Applicant
The Commissioner General, Kenya Revenue Authority
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment and Labour Cause / Post Interlocutory Ruling; Directions for Hearing or Settlement
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent complied with the court order to tabulate and pay all amounts due to the claimant during the interdiction period.
- 2 Whether the transport allowance for the interdiction period was fully paid to the claimant.
- 3 What further steps should be taken to resolve the outstanding issues in the main suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent had provided an affidavit confirming payment of KES 2,310,653.13 to the claimant, which purportedly included all withheld payments and transport allowance for the interdiction period. However, as there remained outstanding issues in the main suit, the court directed the parties to either proceed to hearing as per the memorandum of claim or attempt an out-of-court settlement. The court emphasized the need for expeditious and just resolution, referencing constitutional and statutory mandates to avoid undue technicalities and facilitate access to justice, particularly in light of COVID-19 restrictions.
Court Disposition
Directions issued for parties to proceed with the main suit or negotiate settlement; compliance with previous payment order noted.
Orders
- Parties to proceed with the main suit as per the memorandum of claim dated 22nd February 2016 or attempt out-of-court settlement for outstanding issues.
- A signed copy of the ruling to be availed to each party upon payment of court fees.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
Kirimi v Commissioner General, Kenya Revenue Authority (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E237 of 2016) [2023] KEELRC 3041 (KLR) (23 November 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELRC 3041 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Employment and Labour Relations Cause E237 of 2016
AN Mwaure, J
November 23, 2023
Between
Ashford Mwiti Kirimi
Claimant
and
The Commissioner General, Kenya Revenue Authority
Respondent
Ruling
1. The court delivered its ruling dated 4th October 2022 and court order respondent to award a statement to tabulate what they had paid the claimant during the interdiction period between October 2010 to January 2016.
2. Transport allowance for the same period totalling kshs 3,104,000/-.
3. The respondent has sworn an affidavit affirming they paid the claimant kshs 2,310,653/13 which was inclusive withheld payments during interdiction and transport allowance and the date therein is kshs 14th March 2023.
4. The court having pronounced itself on the application dated 17th March 2023 filed by the respondent would direct the parties to deal with the main suit as per memorandum of claim dated 22nd February 2016. They can take a hearing date but can also attempt to negotiate out of court for any of the outstanding issues. The choice is theirs.
Orders accordingly.dated, signed and delivered virtually in nairobi this 23rdday of november, 2023. ANNA NGIBUINI MWAUREJUDGEOrderIn view of the declaration of measures restricting Court operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic and in light of the directions issued by His Lordship, the Chief Justice on 15th March 2020 and subsequent directions of 21st April 2020 that judgments and rulings shall be delivered through video conferencing or via email. They have waived compliance with Order 21 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which requires that all judgments and rulings be pronounced in open Court. In permitting this course, this Court has been guided by Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution which requires the Court to eschew undue technicalities in delivering justice, the right of access to justice guaranteed to every person under Article 48 of the Constitution and the provisions of Section 1B of the Procedure Act (Chapter 21 of the Laws of Kenya) which impose on this Court the duty of the Court, inter alia, to use suitable technology to enhance the overriding objective which is to facilitate just, expeditious, proportionate and affordable resolution of civil disputes.A signed copy will be availed to each party upon payment of Court fees.