[2015] KEELRC 235 (KLR)

[2015] KEELRC 235 (KLR)

The court found that the Respondent failed to comply with the mandatory redundancy procedures under Section 40 of the Employment Act, 2007, by not issuing the required notices to the Claimants and the County Labour Officer. The Claimants' apprehension regarding non-payment of their dues was deemed reasonable,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEELRC 235 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Paul Koech; Applicant: Bernard Rono; Applicant: David Byegon; Applicant: Philemon Langat; Applicant: Philemon Cheruiyot; Applicant: Violet Rotich; Applicant: Robert Yegon; Applicant: Bernard Chepkwony; Applicant: Alfred Ruto; Applicant: David Keter; Applicant: Eric Too; Applicant: David Njiru; Applicant: Richard Kyalo; Respondent: PureCircle (K) Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kericho
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 241 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Interlocutory Application Ruling
Outcome
Application allowed in part.
Judges
L Ndolo
Legal Topics
Redundancy Procedure, Amendment of Pleadings, Deposit of Security, Terminal Benefits, Notice Requirements
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Redundancy Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Deposit of Security Terminal Benefits Notice Requirements

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Koech

Applicant

Bernard Rono

Applicant

David Byegon

Applicant

Philemon Langat

Applicant

Philemon Cheruiyot

Applicant

Violet Rotich

Applicant

Robert Yegon

Applicant

Bernard Chepkwony

Applicant

Alfred Ruto

Applicant

David Keter

Applicant

Eric Too

Applicant

David Njiru

Applicant

Richard Kyalo

Applicant

PureCircle (K) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Interlocutory Application Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent failed to comply with statutory redundancy procedures under Section 40 of the Employment Act, 2007.
  2. 2 Whether the Claimants should be granted leave to amend their statement of claim.
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent should be ordered to deposit the claimed redundancy dues in court as security.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Respondent failed to comply with the mandatory redundancy procedures under Section 40 of the Employment Act, 2007, by not issuing the required notices to the Claimants and the County Labour Officer. The Claimants' apprehension regarding non-payment of their dues was deemed reasonable, especially in light of the Respondent's financial difficulties and lack of response to the application. The court held that amendments to pleadings are permissible before closure and are necessary for the just determination of the dispute. Consequently, the court allowed the Claimants to amend their statement of claim and ordered the Respondent to deposit 50% of the claimed...

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part.

Orders

  • The Claimants are granted leave to amend their statement of claim; the amended statement is deemed duly filed.
  • The Respondent is directed to deposit Kshs.4,779,321.00, being 50% of the claimed amount, in court within 30 days from the date of the ruling.