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

Joseph Titus Akong’o v Magnum Engineers & General Contractors Limited [2018] KEELRC 428 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 428 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
428
Citation
[2018] KEELRC 428 (KLR)
Decided
3 December 2018
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeEmployment DisputePostureRespondent's Motion to Dismiss ClaimCoramD. K. N. Marete
Holding

The termination was found to be wrongful, unfair, and unlawful.

Facts

Claimant Joseph Titus Akong'o was employed by respondent Magnum Engineers & General Contractors Limited from January 4, 2011 to May 14, 2014. He was terminated on May 14, 2014 without notice and without severance pay.

Issues

  1. Whether the termination was wrongful, unfair, and unlawful
  2. Whether the claimant is entitled to the relief sought
  3. Who bears the costs of the claim

Reasoning

The court found that the claimant had a three-year service period and that the termination was not based on redundancy as claimed by the respondent. The court also noted that the claimant was not served with notice and was not given an audience to explain the reasons for termination.

Outcome

Claimant's claim for wrongful termination and unpaid terminal benefits is upheld.

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to pay the claimant one month's salary in lieu of notice, leave allowance, service gratuity, and salary for the remaining period of the contract

Remedies

  • One month's salary in lieu of notice
  • Leave allowance for three years
  • Service gratuity for three years
  • Salary for the remaining period of the contract

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act, 2007
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case