[2014] KEELRC 144 (KLR)
The court found that although the respondent was entitled to payment for work done, the claimant had resorted to self-help by withholding examination scripts and marks, which adversely affected not only the respondent but also third parties. The court determined that this conduct did not warrant an award of interest...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEELRC 144 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Southern Eastern University College; Respondent: Peterson Ontunya
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 330 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment on Interest and Costs
- Outcome
- Each party to bear their own costs; no interest awarded on the consent sum.
- Legal Topics
- Remuneration Disputes, Interest Awards, Costs of Suit
- 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
Southern Eastern University College
Claimant
Peterson Ontunya
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment on Interest and Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether interest should be awarded on the consent sum of Kshs.645,000 to the respondent.
- 2 Who should bear the costs of the suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the respondent was entitled to payment for work done, the claimant had resorted to self-help by withholding examination scripts and marks, which adversely affected not only the respondent but also third parties. The court determined that this conduct did not warrant an award of interest on the consented sum, as it would set a bad precedent and potentially encourage parties to take matters into their own hands in similar disputes. Regarding costs, the court held that the outcome was essentially a win-win situation, with both parties achieving their primary objectives. Therefore, it was just and equitable for each party to bear their own costs of the suit.
Court Disposition
Each party to bear their own costs; no interest awarded on the consent sum.
Orders
- No interest is awarded on the consent sum of Kshs.645,000.
- Each party shall bear their own costs of the suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 330 OF 2013
SOUTHERN EASTERN UNIVERISTY COLLEGE..............CLAIMANT
-VERSUS-
PETERSON ONTUNYA .................................................RESPONDENT
Mr. Wandati for Claimant
Mr. Kibathi for Respondent
JUDGMENT ON INTEREST AND COSTS
The parties in this matter recorded a consent to this effect.
“By consent of the parties the Claimant to repay the Respondent Kshs.645,000. 00 within 30dyas from the 29th day of May 2014 on condition the Respondent execute clearance forms to be furnished by the Claimant within 30 days.
The parties to file submissions in respect of interest and costs within 21 days from 29th day of May 2014.
The matter to be mentioned on the 26th day of June 2014 to confirm compliance.”
Rule 27(9)(f)of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules 2010 provides;
“provided that subject to these Rules and to any written law, the court may at any time in the conduct of its proceeding issue.
an order for payment of interest on any principal sum awarded by the court.”
Furthermore Rule 28(3) provides
“where a suit involves a liquidated amount that is claimed and specified at the time of filing a statement of claim and the court orders that the amount be paid to the Claimant, the court may in addition to that order direct that interest be paid on the liquidated amount awarded at applicable interest rates as if the suit was filed in the High court”.
In Supermarine handling Services Ltd vs Kenya Revenue Authority (2010) eKLR, it was held that the justification for an award of interest on the Principal sum is to compensate a plaintiff for the deprivation of any money or specific order through the wrong act of a defendant.
It is noteworthy that this suit was filed by the Respondent following the withholding of Student’s examination scripts and marks for failure by the Claimant to pay his remuneration for work done.
This dispute arose on or about the 20th November 2012 and by a letter dated 6th February 2013, he claimed a liquidated amount of Kshs.645,000 which the Respondent has agreed to pay in the filed consent.
It is apparent that the Claimant had taken to self-help by withholding the student’s examination scripts and marks in addition to instituting this suit. These documents were received pursuant to an order of this court dated 7th June, 2014.
The retention of the aforesaid documents was detrimental to the business of the Respondent and to 3rd parties who are not part of the dispute. This is not an appropriate case for the court to award interest on the consent award with a view to discourage people from taking matters in their own hands when faced with a dispute of this nature.
With regard to the issue of costs, the guiding principle is that the costs follow the outcome.
This matter has resulted in a win-win situation given that the claimant got its documents and the Respondent got paid his remuneration.
In the final analysis the court is of the considered view that each party should bear their own costs of the suit.
Dated and Delivered at Nairobi this 31st day of July, 2014.
MATHEWS N. NDUMA
PRINCIPAL JUDGE