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

Morris Mwenda Matiri v Mobicom (K) Limited [2016] KEELRC 1112 (KLR)

[2016] KEELRC 1112 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
1112
Citation
[2016] KEELRC 1112 (KLR)
Decided
9 June 2016
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

TypeEmployment DisputePostureAppeal from a decision of the Employment and Labour Relations CourtCoramBYRAM ONGAYA
The court finds in favor of the claimant, declaring the dismissal unlawful, unfair, and inhuman, and orders the respondent to pay the claimant Kshs. 327,375 by August 1, 2016, with interest at court rates.

Facts

The claimant, Morris Mwenda Matiri, was employed by the respondent, Mobicom (K) Limited, for five years. The respondent dismissed the claimant summarily and claimed that the claimant owed the company Kshs. 195,220 due to alleged shortages. The claimant sought a declaration that the dismissal was unlawful, unfair, and inhuman, and compensation.

Issues

  • Unlawfulness of the dismissal
  • Compensation for terminal benefits and damages

Reasoning

The court finds that the claimant served for five years and was not given statutory annual leave, thus entitled to the benefits he requested.

Outcome

In favor of the claimant

Orders

  • Declaration of unlawful dismissal
  • Payment of Kshs. 327,375 by August 1, 2016
  • Payment of costs of the suit

Remedies

  • Declaration of unlawful dismissal
  • Compensation for terminal benefits and damages

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act
⚠ 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