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

Diana Kageni Mbari v National Empowerment Network of People With HIV/AIDS in Kenya (NEPHAK) [2019] KEELRC 287 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 287 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
287
Citation
[2019] KEELRC 287 (KLR)
Decided
22 November 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeEmployment DisputePostureClaimant vs RespondentCoramBYRAM ONGAYA
Holding

Claimant is awarded Kshs.188,000 for one month salary in lieu of notice and prorated salary for February 2006, and costs of the suit are awarded to the claimant.

Facts

Claimant Diana Kageni Mbari was employed as a Technical Programme Adviser by Respondent National Empowerment Network of People With HIV/AIDS in Kenya (NEPHAK) from June 2, 2005 to December 31, 2005. The contract was extended to a month-to-month contract after December 31, 2005. Claimant worked until February 17, 2006 when she was terminated without notice.

Issues

  1. Whether the claimant is entitled to one month salary in lieu of notice and prorated salary for February 2006
  2. Whether the claimant is entitled to unpaid salary arrears

Reasoning

The Court found that the claimant worked until February 17, 2006 and was terminated without notice, making her entitled to one month salary in lieu of notice. The claimant was also awarded prorated salary for February 2006. The Employment Act, 2007 was not applicable to the cause of action, and the claim for general damages was dismissed.

Outcome

Judgment in favor of the claimant for Kshs.188,000 and costs of the suit.

Orders

  • Payment of Kshs.188,000 by 15.01.2020
  • Award of costs of the suit to the claimant

Remedies

  • One month salary in lieu of notice
  • Prorated salary for February 2006
  • Award of costs of the suit

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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case