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

Alfred Langat v Carzan Flowers (K) Limited [2020] KEELRC 974 (KLR)

[2020] KEELRC 974 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
974
Citation
[2020] KEELRC 974 (KLR)
Decided
4 June 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

TypeUnfair Termination of EmploymentPostureAppeal from the original trialCoramM. MBARU
The claimant's employment was terminated lawfully by the expiration of the contract, and there was no unfair termination. The claimant's claims for compensation, notice pay, and underpayments are dismissed.

Facts

The claimant was employed as a security guard by the respondent from May 13, 2013 to May 16, 2014. The contract was renewed for another six months, but was not renewed on May 16, 2014. The claimant was paid Ksh.5,445 until February 2014, and Ksh.6,071 thereafter. He claimed compensation for unfair termination, notice pay, pay for 16 days worked in May 2014, annual leave, and underpayments.

Issues

  • Unfair termination of employment
  • Compensation for unfair termination
  • Notice pay
  • Pay for 16 days worked in May 2014
  • Annual leave
  • Underpayments

Reasoning

The contract was not renewed due to its expiration, and the claimant was paid according to the Wage Orders. The claimant was not paid for 16 days worked in May 2014, but the respondent offered 1.92 days of annual leave, which was a benefit. The claimant was underpaid by Ksh.12,680.

Outcome

Judgment for the respondent on all claims.

Orders

  • Judgment for the respondent on all claims

Remedies

  • Judgment for the respondent on all claims

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Employment Act, 2007
  • Regulation of Wages (Agricultural Industry) (Amendment) Order, 2013
⚠ 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