[2014] KEELRC 904 (KLR)
The court found that, in the absence of a defence or appearance by the respondent, the claimants' cases were established on a balance of probabilities. The evidence and pleadings on record supported the claimants' assertions of unlawful termination and entitlement to the claimed sums. The court applied the relevant...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEELRC 904 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Peter Dembwa Sumbulika; Applicant: Silas Bor Kibet; Respondent: Canken International
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause Cause189 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Claim / Judgment
- Outcome
- Judgment for the claimants.
- Judges
- B Ongaya
- Legal Topics
- Unlawful Termination, Wages and Remuneration, Service Pay, Compensation for Dismissal
- 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
Peter Dembwa Sumbulika
Applicant
Silas Bor Kibet
Applicant
Canken International
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Claim / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimants were unlawfully terminated from employment.
- 2 Whether the claimants are entitled to pay in lieu of notice, underpayment of wages, service pay, accrued leave, and compensation for unlawful termination.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, in the absence of a defence or appearance by the respondent, the claimants' cases were established on a balance of probabilities. The evidence and pleadings on record supported the claimants' assertions of unlawful termination and entitlement to the claimed sums. The court applied the relevant provisions of the Employment Act, 2007, and awarded the claimants the amounts sought, including pay in lieu of notice, underpayment of wages, service pay, accrued leave (for the second claimant), and compensation for unlawful termination. Costs were also awarded to the claimants.
Court Disposition
Judgment for the claimants.
Orders
- The respondent to pay the 1st claimant Kshs.155,122.00 by 1.05.2013, with interest from the date of judgment until full payment.
- The respondent to pay the 2nd claimant Kshs.144,720.00 by 1.05.2013, with interest from the date of judgment until full payment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU
CAUSE NO. 189 OF 2013
[Formerly Cause No. 795 of 2012 at Nairobi]
PETER DEMBWA SUMBULIKA............................1ST CLAIMANT
SILAS BOR KIBET.................................................2ND CLAIMANT
-VERSUS-
CANKEN INTERNATIONAL.................................RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 28th March, 2014)
JUDGMENT
The claimants filed their respective memorandum of claims on 10. 05. 2012. The first claimant prayed for judgment against the respondent for:
Pay in lieu of notice Kshs.8,234. 00.
Underpayment of wages Kshs.6,468. 00.
Service pay Kshs.19,000. 00.
12 months compensation for unlawful termination Kshs.98,808. 00.
Total claim being Kshs.155,122. 00.
The second claimant prayed for judgment against the respondent for:
Pay in lieu of notice Kshs.8,234. 00.
Underpayment of wages Kshs.6,468. 00.
Service pay of Kshs.14,251. 00.
Accrued leave days for 3 years Kshs.16,959. 00.
12 months salary compensation for unlawful termination Kshs.98,808. 00.
Total claim Kshs.144,720. 00.
The respondent appointed Mengich & Company Advocates who filed the notice of appointment on 17. 07. 2012. On 27. 09. 2013, the respondent filed the notice of change of advocates and appointed Magut Kirigo & Sang Advocates to act in place of their initially appointed Advocates. Despite service, the respondent did not file a memorandum of response. The case was fixed for hearing on 24. 03. 2014. The advocate for the respondent was in court on 17. 12. 2013 when the case was fixed for hearing but the advocate or the respondent did not attend court on the hearing date. The 1st claimant took the option that the case be determined on the basis of the pleadings and documents on record.
The court has considered the pleadings and the documents on record. In absence of a defence by the respondent, the court finds that the claimants have established their respective cases on a balance of probability and they are entitled as prayed for.
In conclusion, judgment is entered for the claimants against the respondent for:
The respondent to pay the 1st claimant Kshs.155,122. 00and the 2nd claimant Kshs.144,720. 00by 1. 05. 2013 and in default, interest to run from the date of judgment till full payment.
The respondent to pay the claimants’ costs of the case fixed at Kshs.50,000. 00by 1. 05. 2013 and in default, interest to run from the date of judgment till full payment.
Signed, datedanddeliveredin court atNakuruthisFriday, 28th March, 2014.
BYRAM ONGAYA
JUDGE