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

Luka Mbuvi v Economic Industries Limited [2020] KEELRC 1167 (KLR)

[2020] KEELRC 1167 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
1167
Citation
[2020] KEELRC 1167 (KLR)
Decided
8 May 2020
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeUnfair Termination of EmploymentPostureAppeal from an original trialCoramRadido Stephen
Holding

The Court finds and declares that there was unfair termination of employment. The Court declines to award compensation. The Respondent to compute and pay the Claimant pro-rated leave for 2015.

Facts

Claimant Luka Mbuvi was employed as a machine operator by Respondent Economic Industries Limited until around 11 April 2015. On 22 May 2015, Claimant initiated proceedings alleging unfair termination of employment and breach of contract. Respondent denied unfair termination and contended that Claimant absconded from work.

Issues

  1. Unfair termination of employment
  2. Compensation
  3. Overtime and holidays
  4. Gratuity
  5. Leave

Reasoning

The Court finds that the Claimant did not report back to work after being released by the Police, which constitutes desertion. The Respondent did not accept the repudiation, thus the termination was unfair.

Outcome

Unfair termination of employment

Orders

  • The Respondent to compute and pay the Claimant pro-rated leave for 2015

Remedies

  • Pro-rated leave for 2015

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act, 2007
Cases cited (2)
  • Philomena Aromba Mbalasi v Uni-Truck World Ltd (2015) eKLR
  • Geys v Societe Generale, London Branch (2012) UKSC 63
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