Adeya v Quick Mart Limited (Cause E156 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 3261 (KLR) (7 December 2023) (Judgment)
- Court
- Employment & Labour Relations Court
- Case number
- 3261
- Citation
- [2023] KEELRC 3261 (KLR)
- Decided
- 7 December 2023
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeEmployment DisputePostureClaimant's AppealCoramBYRAM ONGAYA
Holding
The Court finds that the claimant was an employee and the termination was unfair. The Court awards compensation of Kshs.945,000.00 less tax for the unfair termination.
Facts
Claimant, a human resource practitioner, was employed by Quick Mart Limited under a consultancy agreement. He was terminated on 28.02.2020, and the contract was to lapse on 13.04.2020. The claimant alleged unfair termination and sought various remedies.
Issues
- Whether the claimant was an employee within the meaning of the Employment Act 2007.
- Whether the termination was unfair.
- Whether the claimant was entitled to compensation, overtime pay, and house allowance.
Reasoning
The Court held that the termination was unfair due to the lack of proper notice and the claimant's performance did not meet expectations. The claimant was awarded compensation for the unfair termination.
Outcome
Judgment in favor of the claimant.
Orders
- Declaration that the claimant was an employee within the meaning of the Employment Act 2007.
- Declaration that the termination of the claimant’s employment on account of poor performance was unfair.
- Award for payment of Kshs.945,000.00 less tax for the unfair termination.
- Declaration that the respondent ought to have contributed for the claimant’s NHIF and NSSF contributions.
- Award of costs of the suit.
Remedies
- Declaration that the claimant was an employee.
- Compensation for unfair termination.
- Declaration that respondent should contribute to NHIF and NSSF.
- Award of costs.
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…