[2017] KEELRC 927 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 927 (KLR)

The court held that reinstatement is a final remedy in employment law and cannot be granted at the interlocutory stage without a full hearing of the substantive cause. The court further found that the applicant had not provided sufficient details regarding the date and circumstances of termination to justify payment...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 927 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Rachel Thira Gitau; Respondent: Rift Valley Sports Club
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 266 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Urgent Application for Reinstatement and Related Reliefs
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
MSA Makhandia
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Relief, Reinstatement, Termination of Employment, Remuneration Pending Suit
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Interlocutory Relief Reinstatement Termination of Employment Remuneration Pending Suit

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rachel Thira Gitau

Applicant

Rift Valley Sports Club

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Urgent Application for Reinstatement and Related Reliefs

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to interlocutory reinstatement pending hearing and determination of the main cause.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to payment of June 2017 salary at the interlocutory stage.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant should be granted unhindered access to the respondent's premises pending determination of the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that reinstatement is a final remedy in employment law and cannot be granted at the interlocutory stage without a full hearing of the substantive cause. The court further found that the applicant had not provided sufficient details regarding the date and circumstances of termination to justify payment of June 2017 salary as an interim measure. Additionally, the request for unhindered access to the respondent's premises was denied as the employment relationship was pleaded as having ended. The court concluded that the application lacked merit and dismissed it with costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The motion dated 23 June 2017 is dismissed with costs in the cause.