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

Chadda v Lake Turkana Wind Power Limited (Cause E702 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 338 (KLR) (9 February 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEELRC 338 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
338
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 338 (KLR)
Decided
9 February 2023
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

TypeLabour DisputePostureClaimant's AppealCoramNDOLO, Odunga, Warsame
The Mutual Separation and Confidentiality Deed is not unconscionable, unlawful, or unfair. The Court orders the proceedings to be stayed pending arbitration.

Facts

The Claimant, Ashish Chadda, was employed as the Chief Finance Officer of Lake Turkana Wind Power Limited. He signed a Mutual Separation and Confidentiality Deed dated July 23, 2021, which was later challenged by the Respondent.

Issues

  • Unconscionability of the Mutual Separation and Confidentiality Deed
  • Unlawfulness of the termination of employment
  • Violation of fundamental rights
  • Damages for breach of fair labour practice
  • Damages for harassment, humiliation, embarrassment and defamation
  • Reinstatement to employment

Reasoning

The Court finds the Deed not unconscionable and orders arbitration. The Claimant's delay in challenging the Deed is noted.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Proceedings are stayed pending arbitration

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Article 41 of the Constitution
  • Article 47 of the Constitution
⚠ 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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case