Makilya v Ready Consultancy Limited (Cause E673 of 2024) [2026] KEELRC 1359 (KLR) (21 May 2026) (Judgment)

Makilya v Ready Consultancy Limited (Cause E673 of 2024) [2026] KEELRC 1359 (KLR) (21 May 2026) (Judgment)

The Respondent did not object to or appeal the Director’s WIBA assessment and simply refused to pay. That created a liquidated claim within the Court’s residual jurisdiction, allowing the Court to adopt and enforce the award as a decree. The Claimant proved entitlement to the assessed compensation and interest, but...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEELRC 1359 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: PETER KISILU MAKILYA; Respondent: READY CONSULTANCY LIMITED
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause E673 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment and Labour Relations Court Judgment on Enforcement of WIBA Award / Judgment After Formal Proof Following Failure to Enter Appearance
Outcome
Judgment entered for the Claimant in part
Judges
["ON Makau"]
Legal Topics
Enforcement of WIBA Award, Jurisdiction of ELRC, Formal Proof, Interest on Liquidated Claim, Costs, Refusal to Pay Assessed Compensation
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Law Occupational Injury Compensation Civil Procedure Enforcement of WIBA Award Jurisdiction of ELRC Formal Proof Interest on Liquidated Claim Costs +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PETER KISILU MAKILYA

Claimant

READY CONSULTANCY LIMITED

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment and Labour Relations Court Judgment on Enforcement of WIBA Award / Judgment After Formal Proof Following Failure to Enter Appearance

  1. 1 Whether the Court has jurisdiction to enforce an award made by the Director of Occupational Safety and Health under the Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought
  3. 3 Whether general damages and exemplary/punitive damages are available in enforcement of a WIBA award

Ratio Decidendi

The Respondent did not object to or appeal the Director’s WIBA assessment and simply refused to pay. That created a liquidated claim within the Court’s residual jurisdiction, allowing the Court to adopt and enforce the award as a decree. The Claimant proved entitlement to the assessed compensation and interest, but the Court declined general and exemplary damages because its enforcement jurisdiction did not extend that far.

Court Disposition

Judgment entered for the Claimant in part

Orders

  • Respondent to pay Kshs. 2,872,615 being the WIBA award
  • Interest on Kshs. 2,872,615 at court rates from 27th October 2022 until payment in full