Sabina Wambura Ributhi v Defence Forces Canteen Organisation [2018] KEELRC 632 (KLR)
- Court
- Employment & Labour Relations Court
- Case number
- 632
- Citation
- [2018] KEELRC 632 (KLR)
- Decided
- 16 November 2018
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeEmployment DisputePostureClaimant vs RespondentCoramBYRAM ONGAYA
Holding
The Court finds that the claimant is not entitled to acting allowance and the respondent's recovery is unfair and unjustified.
Facts
The claimant, Sabina Wambura Ributhi, was employed by the Defence Forces Canteen Organisation as a Supplies Clerk III in November 2006. She was promoted to Supplies Assistant Job Group 8 on September 12, 2014. The claimant claimed she was not paid acting allowance for acting as Manager in stores C, D, and E from April 2014 to September 15, 2015.
Issues
- Whether the claimant is entitled to acting allowance for acting as Manager
- Whether the respondent's recovery of Kshs. 1,133,405.90 from the claimant is fair and lawful
Reasoning
The claimant failed to provide evidence of a written appointment to act as Manager and acting allowance. The investigation report did not implicate the claimant in the stock losses.
Outcome
Judgment in favor of the claimant
Orders
- The respondent to rescind the decision of deducting the claimant's salary on monthly basis by way of recoveries and the recoveries to stop forthwith
- The respondent to refund all monies already deducted from the claimant's salary and to refund all of it by 05.12.2018 failing interest to be payable thereon from the date of the judgment till full payment
- Dismissal of the counterclaim
- The respondent to pay the costs of the claim and counterclaim
Remedies
- Refund of all monies already deducted from the claimant's salary
- Rescission of the decision of deducting the claimant's salary on monthly basis by way of recoveries
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.
Loading judgment…