[2021] KEELRC 2335 (KLR)
The court found that the claimant's application for review was unmerited because the issues raised were not matters for review but rather grounds for appeal. The court had already considered the evidence and awarded what was legally justifiable—compensation for unfair termination and one month's salary in lieu of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELRC 2335 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Stephen Limo; Respondent: The B.O.M St Cecilia Girls Secondary School
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 338 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Review of Judgment, Unpaid Salaries, Leave Entitlements, Compensation for Unfair Termination
- 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
Stephen Limo
Applicant
The B.O.M St Cecilia Girls Secondary School
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court failed to address all prayers and reliefs sought by the claimant in the original judgment.
- 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to unpaid salary, untaken leave, and general damages for mental torture due to unlawful suspension.
- 3 Whether the application raises grounds for review or is an attempt to appeal the court's own judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimant's application for review was unmerited because the issues raised were not matters for review but rather grounds for appeal. The court had already considered the evidence and awarded what was legally justifiable—compensation for unfair termination and one month's salary in lieu of notice. The additional claims for unpaid salary, untaken leave, and general damages were unsupported by evidence at trial, and the claim for salary until determination of the suit was not legally sustainable. The court emphasized that it could not sit on appeal over its own judgment and that any jurisdictional errors should be addressed through the appellate process, not by review.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application for review is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT UASIN GISHU
COURT NAME: ELDORET LAW COURT
CASE NUMBER: ELRC.C/338/2017
CITATION: STEPHEN LIMO VS THE B.O.M ST CECILIA GIRLS SECONDARY SCHOOL
RULING
By an application dated 19th November, 2020 the Claimant sought an order of review of the Court’s judgement delivered on 28th November, 2019.
2. The application we based on the grounds among others that the Court upon delivery of judgement on 28th November, 2019 inadvertently did not address itself on all prayers and reliefs sought. According to the Claimant, the entire claim was uncontroverted.
3. At paragraph 2. 15 of the statement of claim, the Claimant sought judgement for unpaid salary with effect from April, 2017. The Claimant further sought unpaid salary until hearing and determination of the suit. The Claimant further sought to be paid untaken leave for the years 2015, 2016 and 2017. The Claimant further sought general damages for mental torture due to unlawful suspension.
4. The Claimant though pleaded as above, did not lead any evidence during the trial to support the claims. For instance, the Claimant never alleged during the trial that he was not paid salary from April 2017 and for what period to justify the claim for Kshs. 49,005/=. No allegation was made during the trial that the Claimant for the period he worked, never went on leave.
5. The claim for unpaid salary until hearing and determination of the suit has no basis in law since Section 49 of the Employment Act caps the amount of compensation awarded to any successful litigant at twelve month’s wages. The Claimant further did not come out clear or at all, in what way the suspension and allegation of theft of the phone caused him anger and mental torture.
6. It is indeed correct that the Court awarded the Claimant compensation for unfair termination of service and one month’s salary in lieu of notice. That was what the Court felt, in law could be awarded. Although the Claimant now raises the issue of reinstatement, this was never pleaded. No evidence was led concerning the same during the trial hence the Court had no basis for making the award.
7. In conclusion, the Court has considered the application as presented and as of the view that the same borders on asking the Court to sit on appeal on its own judgement. The issues raised in the application are not matters for review. They are if errors, jurisdictional errors which the Claimant, if aggrieved by the judgement can raise an appeal.
8. The application is therefore found unmerited and is hereby dismissed with costs.
9. It is so ordered.
DATED AT ELDORET THIS 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021
Delivered at Nairobi this 15th day of March, 2021
SIGNED BY: HON. JUSTICE J. N. ABUODHA
THE JUDICIARY OF KENYA.
ELDORET ELRC
EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
DATE: 2021-03-15 01:03:46+03