[2019] KEELRC 1502 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent had complied with the order to the extent required by law, as it was only obligated to retain employment records for 36 months under section 74(d) of the Employment Act. Since there was no substantive suit filed together with the motion, the court held that interim orders could...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELRC 1502 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Panyako Kefa Emojong; Respondent: Devki Steel Mills Ltd
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1065 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Cause / Ruling on Review Application
- Outcome
- review application granted; matter closed
- Judges
- DI Wasike
- Legal Topics
- Employment Records Retention, Tax Compliance Obligations, Review of Court 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
Panyako Kefa Emojong
Claimant
Devki Steel Mills Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Cause / Ruling on Review Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent is obligated to furnish KRA P9 forms for the period 2000-2015 to the claimant.
- 2 Whether the respondent's statutory obligation to retain employment records extends beyond 36 months.
- 3 Whether interim orders can be granted in the absence of a substantive suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent had complied with the order to the extent required by law, as it was only obligated to retain employment records for 36 months under section 74(d) of the Employment Act. Since there was no substantive suit filed together with the motion, the court held that interim orders could not be granted indefinitely or converted into final orders. The court further noted that any dispute regarding tax compliance should be addressed with the Kenya Revenue Authority, which has the statutory mandate to demand tax compliance records from the respondent. Consequently, the review application was granted, and the matter was ordered closed.
Court Disposition
review application granted; matter closed
Orders
- The review application is granted.
- The issue of tax compliance, if still relevant, should be pursued with the assistance of the Kenya Revenue Authority.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NUMBER 1065 OF 2017
PANYAKO KEFA EMOJONG....CLAIMANT/RESPONDENT
VERSUS
DEVKI STEEL MILLS LTD...............................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The respondent herein filed a memorandum of review dated 3rd July, 2018 in which it seeks review of the order of the court made on 26th June, 2018. The order sought to be reviewed required the respondent to furnish the claimants with KRA P9 forms for the period 2000-2015 since tax records were a statutory obligation.
2. The respondent in the review application has stated that it has complied with the order of the court and further under section 74(d) it was only required to keep employment records for 36 months. The court has noted that there is no substantive suit filed together with the Motion dated 22nd June, 2018.
3. The interim orders therefore cannot be granted indefinitely or rather as final orders without a substantive suit. The dispute herein seems to be over the respondent’s tax compliance with regard to the claimants. If this be the case, the issue ought to be taken up with the relevant authorizes which in this case is Kenya Revenue Authority which has powers to demand of the respondent to produce tax compliance records.
4. In the circumstances the court will grant the review application and direct that the issue if still relevant be pursued with assistance of KRA. There being no substantive suit pending the matter is hereby ordered closed.
5. It is so ordered.
Dated at Nairobi this 24th day of May 2019
Abuodha J. N.
Judge
Delivered this 24th day of May 2019
Abuodha J. N.
Judge
In the presence of:-
…………………………………………………………for the Claimant and
……………………………………………………………for the Respondent.