[2020] KEELRC 1428 (KLR)
The court found that both parties agreed the claimant was suspended on 20.05.2016, not 20.06.2016 as previously recorded in the judgment. This constituted an error apparent on the face of the record. The error affected the computation of the claimant's entitlement, specifically omitting payment for 14 days. Upon...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELRC 1428 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Mary Njambi Njenga; Respondent: Equity Bank Kenya Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 2593 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
- Outcome
- application for review allowed in part
- Judges
- B Ongaya
- Legal Topics
- Review of Judgment, Error Apparent on Record, Suspension Period Computation, Remuneration Entitlement
- 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
Mary Njambi Njenga
Applicant
Equity Bank Kenya Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there was an error apparent on the record regarding the claimant's suspension date.
- 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to additional payment due to the error in computation of the suspension period.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that both parties agreed the claimant was suspended on 20.05.2016, not 20.06.2016 as previously recorded in the judgment. This constituted an error apparent on the face of the record. The error affected the computation of the claimant's entitlement, specifically omitting payment for 14 days. Upon review, the court corrected the suspension period and determined that the claimant was entitled to an additional Kshs.51,333.30. The application for review was therefore allowed to the extent of correcting the computation and awarding the additional sum, with each party bearing their own costs.
Court Disposition
application for review allowed in part
Orders
- The respondent to pay the claimant Kshs.51,333.30 by 01.05.2020, failing which interest shall accrue at court rates from the date of this ruling until full payment.
- Each party to bear own costs of the application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 2593 OF 2016
MARY NJAMBI NJENGA.........................CLAIMANT
-VERSUS-
EQUITY BANK KENYA LIMITED....RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 13th March, 2020)
RULING
The application was filed for the claimant on 16. 01. 2020 through Nderi & Mwangi Company Advocates. It is under rule 33 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules. It seeks review of the judgment delivered on 01. 11. 2019 and consequential to the review, the Court to order the respondent to pay the claimant an additional Kshs.110, 000. 00 with interest until payment in full. the ground for seeking review is that there is an error apparent on record that the claimant was suspended on 20. 05. 2016 as per page 5 of the judgment but in computing the award at page 9 of the judgment the Court erroneously stated that the suspension was on 20. 06. 2016 with the consequence that one month pay being Kshs.110, 000. 00 was omitted.
The respondent has opposed the application by filing the grounds of opposition on 06. 02. 2020 through Robson Harris and Company Advocates. It is urged that there is no error on record; the application is incompetent, frivolous, misconceived and an abuse of Court process; the decretal amount is accurate because the court factored in the period the claimant worked for the respondent; the application creates unnecessary anxiety because the judgment sum has already been paid to the claimant by the respondent.
The parties made their oral submissions. It is common ground that the claimant was in fact suspended on 20. 05. 2016 and the Court returns that the applicant has established a valid error on record which is liable to correction. The further common ground is that the period in page 9 of the judgment subject to the computation for pay was 20. 05. 2016 to 05. 12. 2016 so that the period in the error now corrected leaves outstanding 14 days for payment and consequential to the review, the Court returns that only Kshs.51, 333. 30 is payable accordingly.
In conclusion, the application for review herein is hereby allowed with orders:
a. The respondent to pay the claimant Kshs.51, 333. 30 by 01. 05. 2020 failing interest to be payable thereon at Court rates from the date of this ruling till full payment.
b. Each party to bear own costs of the application.
Signed, datedanddeliveredin court atNairobithisFriday, 13th March, 2020.
BYRAM ONGAYA
JUDGE