[2017] KEELRC 964 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 964 (KLR)

The court held that the claimant was entitled to gratuity as stipulated in his employment contract because he completed his contract term and was not terminated for gross misconduct. The contract expressly provided that gratuity would only be withheld if the claimant was separated from employment due to gross...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 964 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Nyundo Katemboh; Respondent: Kwale Water & Sewerage Company
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 6 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant.
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Gratuity Entitlement, Fixed Term Contracts, Gross Misconduct, Summary Dismissal, Employment Contract Interpretation
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Gratuity Entitlement Fixed Term Contracts Gross Misconduct Summary Dismissal Employment Contract Interpretation

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

Parties

Nyundo Katemboh

Claimant

Kwale Water & Sewerage Company

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to payment of service gratuity under the employment contract after completion of his fixed term contract.
  2. 2 Whether allegations of gross misconduct, absent termination for such misconduct, can disqualify the claimant from gratuity payment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the claimant was entitled to gratuity as stipulated in his employment contract because he completed his contract term and was not terminated for gross misconduct. The contract expressly provided that gratuity would only be withheld if the claimant was separated from employment due to gross misconduct before the expiry of the contract. Since the respondent allowed the claimant to serve the full term and only raised allegations of misconduct after the fact, without effecting a termination on that basis, the claimant's right to gratuity vested. The respondent's counterclaim was dismissed, and the claimant was awarded gratuity for both the three-year term and the six-month...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant.

Orders

  • The respondent shall pay the claimant Ksh.1,953,000 as gratuity.
  • The respondent shall pay costs and interest to the claimant.