SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Kudheiha Workers v Kangema High School [2015] KEELRC 1024 (KLR)

[2015] KEELRC 1024 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
1024
Citation
[2015] KEELRC 1024 (KLR)
Decided
5 June 2015
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeLabor DisputePostureRespondent's preliminary objection on time-barred and barred from claiming gratuityCoramBYRAM ONGAYA
The court finds that the suit was not time barred and that the claimant was not barred from claiming gratuity.

Facts

The claimant filed a suit alleging refusal by the respondent's board of governors to pay terminal benefits for Stephen Mwangi and Samuel Kariuki. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the suit was time-barred and barred due to the claimants' membership in the National Social Security Fund.

Issues

  • Whether the claimant's suit was time barred.
  • Whether the claimant was barred from claiming gratuity due to the provisions of section 35 (6) (d) of the Employment Act 2007.

Reasoning

The court held that the suit was not time barred as the dispute was reported to the Minister within the prescribed period and the Minister accepted the dispute. The court also found that the claimants were not barred from claiming gratuity as their collective agreement provided for gratuity.

Outcome

The respondent's preliminary objection is dismissed, and the respondent is ordered to pay the claimant's costs.

Orders

  • The respondent shall pay the claimant's costs in that regard.
  • The parties are now invited to take directions with a view of fixing the suit for hearing.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Employment Act 2007
  • Labour Relations Act 2007
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case