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

Joseph Mwanza v Charleston Travel Limited [2020] KEELRC 1534 (KLR)

[2020] KEELRC 1534 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
1534
Citation
[2020] KEELRC 1534 (KLR)
Decided
24 February 2020
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 an original trial decisionCoramRadido Stephen
Claimant entitled to salary up to 8 April 2012 and 23 days leave commuted, totaling Kshs 415,615/-; liable to Respondent in the total sum of Kshs 210,510/80; judgment for Claimant Kshs 205,105/-

Facts

Claimant Joseph Mwanza resigned from his position as Student Travel Agent General Manager with Respondent Charleston Travel Limited on 8 March 2012. He claimed breach of contract and sought compensation for salary in lieu of notice, accrued leave days, mileage for March 2012, and terminal dues. Respondent denied the breach and counterclaimed for training bond and staff loan.

Issues

  • Salary in lieu of notice
  • Accrued leave days
  • Mileage allowance
  • Calculated terminal dues
  • Training bond

Reasoning

The court found the Claimant entitled to salary up to 8 April 2012 and leave commuted, and liable for the calculated terminal dues. The training bond claim was dismissed.

Outcome

Claimant wins

Orders

  • Judgment for Claimant Kshs 205,105/-
  • Each party to bear own costs

Remedies

  • Salary up to 8 April 2012
  • 23 days leave commuted
  • Judgment for Kshs 205,105/-
⚠ 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