[2018] KEELRC 848 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 848 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff was entrusted with Kshs.500,000 by the community, not the Defendant, and there was no evidence of misappropriation. The Plaintiff disclosed the receipt and use of the funds, and the Defendant failed to prove any loss or breach attributable to the Plaintiff. The summary dismissal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 848 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Stephen Wachira Murakaru; Defendant: Tana & Athi River Development Authority
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 1737 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the Plaintiff; counterclaim dismissed.
Judges
MN Nduma, DO Ogal
Legal Topics
Summary Dismissal, Wrongful Termination, Pension Entitlements, Notice Pay, Limitation of Actions, Breach of Contract
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Summary Dismissal Wrongful Termination Pension Entitlements Notice Pay Limitation of Actions Breach of Contract

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Wachira Murakaru

Plaintiff

Tana & Athi River Development Authority

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of the Plaintiff was for a lawful reason.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs sought.
  3. 3 Whether the counter claim is time barred and if not, whether it has any merit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff was entrusted with Kshs.500,000 by the community, not the Defendant, and there was no evidence of misappropriation. The Plaintiff disclosed the receipt and use of the funds, and the Defendant failed to prove any loss or breach attributable to the Plaintiff. The summary dismissal was therefore wrongful and unfair. As the dismissal occurred before the Employment Act, 2007, the applicable law was Cap 226, which did not provide for compensation but allowed for common law damages. The Plaintiff was entitled to the employer's pension contribution, withheld salary during suspension, and notice pay. The Defendant's counterclaim was time-barred under the...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Plaintiff; counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay Plaintiff Kshs.829,440 for withheld and unpaid salary during suspension.
  • Defendant to pay Plaintiff Kshs.207,360 in lieu of three months' notice.