[2014] KEELRC 624 (KLR)
The court found that the employer had acted in defiance of a clear status quo order by proceeding with the disciplinary process and terminating the claimant's employment after being expressly directed to maintain the existing employment relationship. The application for review of the reinstatement order was found to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEELRC 624 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Maths Trading Company Limited; Applicant: Catherine Mwihaki Ngambi
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 213 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Application for Review of Reinstatement Order
- Outcome
- application for review declined; reinstatement order upheld
- Legal Topics
- Interim Injunctions, Disciplinary Process, Reinstatement, Status Quo Orders
- 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
Maths Trading Company Limited
Respondent
Catherine Mwihaki Ngambi
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Application for Review of Reinstatement Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the employer was in contempt of court by terminating the claimant's employment contrary to a status quo order.
- 2 Whether the application for review of the reinstatement order had merit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the employer had acted in defiance of a clear status quo order by proceeding with the disciplinary process and terminating the claimant's employment after being expressly directed to maintain the existing employment relationship. The application for review of the reinstatement order was found to lack merit, as the employer failed to demonstrate any valid basis for non-compliance or for setting aside the reinstatement. The court emphasized the importance of obedience to court orders and directed the employer to comply with the reinstatement order pending the hearing of the main claim.
Court Disposition
application for review declined; reinstatement order upheld
Orders
- The application for review is declined.
- The employer is directed to comply with the reinstatement order.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NUMBER 213 OF 2014
BETWEEN
MATHS TRADING COMPANY LIMITED.......................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
CATHERINE MWIHAKI NGAMBI............................................RESPONDENT
RULING
The Employee Catherine Mwihaki Ngambi Filed a Claim on 19th December 2013, in which she seeks against the Respondent Employer for orders:-
(a) That a permanent injuction restraining the Respondent from terminating the Claimant’s employment based on the facts giving rise to this cause be issued.
(b) Letter calling the claimant to disciplinary hearing be declared null and void.
The Statement of Claim was accompanied by an application seeking the same orders as in the Claim, on an interim basis.
The application came before the Court on 19th December 2013. The Court gave procedural directions on service and filing of the Replying Affidavit/Grounds of Opposition, and fixed the matter for 27th December 2013 before Justice Maureen Onyango.
On 27th December 2013, the Employee’s Advocate prayed for an interim order, which was to prevent termination of the Employee’s contract of employment, pending the hearing and determination of the Claim.
Mr. Ombanjo for the Employer told the Court that the Employer was served with the Court Order, so no disciplinary meeting took place. He sought 21 days to file a Replying Affidavit.
The Court made the following Orders:-
1. Employer granted leave to File the Replying Affidavit on or before 21st January 2014.
2. The Application be heard in Court 5 on 28th January 2014 inter partes.
3. Current Status Quo to obtain until the 28th January 2014.
When the Parties came on 28th January 2014, Mr. Ojijo for the Employer confirmed that a disciplinary process had taken place after 27th December 2013, and the Claimant’s contract terminated.
The Court found this was in defiance of the Orders of Status Quo of 27th December 2013. The Court was clear on 27th December 2013 parties were to retain current Status Quo. Mr. Ombajo had submitted no disciplinary process had taken place after initial orders issued, and there can be no justification in misunderstanding of the orders of 27th December 2013.
The Court ordered the Employer to reinstate the Claimant until 4th March 2014. Instead, the Employer filed an application for Review of the Reinstatement Order.
The application has been canvassed today by Mr. Ombajo for the Employer, and Mr. Mukele for the Employee.
Upon perusal of the record the Court finds and Orders:-
(a) The application for review has no merit and is declined;
(b) The employer is directed to comply with the Orders previously issued by this Court;
(c) Parties to proceed with the other hearing on 4th March 2014 as scheduled.
Lastly, parties are advised to endeavor and fix the main claim for hearing on a priority basis. This Court does not ordinarily interfere with disciplinary processes at the Employment place, but all parties must defer to the Orders of the Court.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 25th day of February 2014
James Rika
Judge