[2021] KEELRC 1316 (KLR)
The court held that while there is no doubt a debt is due to the claimants, the precise sum must be ascertained by the parties themselves, as there is no mutual acknowledgment of payments made and received. The court directed the parties to return within 30 days with a clear account of sums paid and any outstanding...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELRC 1316 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Susan Mumbua; Applicant: Lorna Tsisiga; Applicant: Tivender Kaur Juttla; Applicant: Johannes Oluoch; Applicant: Joan Wangui Kariuki; Applicant: Harrison Ndwiga Muriithi; Applicant: Daniel Muema Mutangili; Respondent: Navitas Limited; Respondent: Australian University Studies Institute (AUSI); Respondent: AUSEDKEN Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 350 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Court's Decision on Quantum of Decree
- Outcome
- Application for review allowed to the extent that parties must account for payments and outstanding sums; matter to be mentioned for further directions.
- Judges
- AN Makau
- Legal Topics
- Review of Judgment, Quantum of Terminal Dues, Computation of 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
Susan Mumbua
Applicant
Lorna Tsisiga
Applicant
Tivender Kaur Juttla
Applicant
Johannes Oluoch
Applicant
Joan Wangui Kariuki
Applicant
Harrison Ndwiga Muriithi
Applicant
Daniel Muema Mutangili
Applicant
Navitas Limited
Respondent
Australian University Studies Institute (AUSI)
Respondent
AUSEDKEN Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Court's Decision on Quantum of Decree
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court erred in determining the sum due on the decree as Kshs. 8,708,506.75.
- 2 Whether the amount awarded exceeded the sum declared as due and owing in the judgment.
- 3 How the sums paid and received by each claimant should be ascertained.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that while there is no doubt a debt is due to the claimants, the precise sum must be ascertained by the parties themselves, as there is no mutual acknowledgment of payments made and received. The court directed the parties to return within 30 days with a clear account of sums paid and any outstanding amounts, with the claimants required to make full disclosure of all payments received. The matter is to be mentioned on a future date for further directions. The court thus did not conclusively determine the quantum but ordered a process for accurate computation and disclosure.
Court Disposition
Application for review allowed to the extent that parties must account for payments and outstanding sums; matter to be mentioned for further directions.
Orders
- Parties to return to court within 30 days with clear accounts of sums paid and any sums owed.
- Claimants to compute and disclose all sums received and alleged to be owing, accounting for every cent paid.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT & LABOUR RELATIONS
COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 350 OF 2015
SUSAN MUMBUA..................................................................1ST CLAIMANT
LORNA TSISIGA...................................................................2ND CLAIMANT
TIVENDER KAUR JUTTLA.....................................................3RD CLAIMANT
JOHANNES OLUOCH..........................................................4TH CLAIMANT
JOAN WANGUI KARIUKI....................................................5TH CLAIMANT
HARRISON NDWIGA MURIITHI........................................6TH CLAIMANT
DANIEL MUEMA MUTANGILI..............................................7TH CLAIMANT
VERSUS
NAVITAS LIMITED.............................................................1ST RESPONDENT
AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY STUDIES
INSTITUTE (AUSI).............................................................2ND RESPONDENT
AUSEDKEN LIMITED.........................................................3RD RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The Claimants/Applicants seek the review of the decision of the Court made on 9th February 2021. In the motion seeking the said review, it is asserted that the Court fell into a grave error in making a determination that the sum due on the decree is some Kshs. 8,708,506. 75. It is argued that the sum is in excess of the amount the Court declared as due and owing.
2. It is not doubted that there is a debt due to the Claimants. As I stated on 9th February 2021, the decree that was issued herein was after a judgment of the Court. My brother Radido J. determined on 19th July 2019 that the Claimants were entitled to the reliefs he granted being the equivalent of 6 months gross wages amounting to Kshs. 6,622,158/- plus a sum that is not computed as terminal dues per the letters dated 3rd February 2015. The Claimants were also entitled to costs of the suit as well. The Claimants argue that the reliefs sought are in respect of the letters dated 3rd February 2015. As the learned Judge held as much, the parties would be the best suited to take accounts and ascertain in respect of each Claimant how much has been paid since there is no acknowledgement by the parties of the sums paid and received. It has not escaped the attention of the Court that the Respondents have been rather vague about payments and in that regard the parties must return to Court within 30 days of today clearly having set out the sums paid and if any sum is owed. The Claimants are to compute the sums received and alleged to be owing taking into account every cent paid to them and must of necessity make full disclosure. Matter to be mentioned on 29th July 2021.
It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2021
NZIOKI WA MAKAU
JUDGE