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

Zaidi v Lake Turkana Wind Power Limited (Cause E321 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 3414 (KLR) (20 December 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEELRC 3414 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
3414
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 3414 (KLR)
Decided
20 December 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

TypeLabor DisputePostureRespondent's Application for Arbitration and CostsCoramOCHARO
The Court has jurisdiction to determine the validity of the Mutual Separation Agreement and will not refer the dispute to arbitration.

Facts

The Claimant and Respondent entered into a Mutual Separation and Confidentiality Deed on July 30, 2021, terminating the Claimant's employment. The Respondent filed a Chamber Summons Application seeking arbitration and costs.

Issues

  • Whether the dispute should be referred to arbitration
  • Whether the Court should order the Claimant to deposit Kshs.5,000,000/- as security for costs

Reasoning

The Court found that the Arbitration Act restricts its jurisdiction to entertain the matter, and the Mutual Separation Agreement is a valid contract that does not require arbitration.

Outcome

The application was dismissed.

Orders

  • The Court dismissed the application for arbitration.
  • The Court ordered the Claimant to deposit Kshs.5,000,000/- in court or a joint account in the names of Counsel for the parties, as security for costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Arbitration Act, 1995
  • Employment and Labour Relations Act, 2011
Cases cited (2)
  • Owners of the Motor Vessel “Lilian S’’ v Caltex Oil [Kenya]Ltd [1989] eKLR
  • Pauline Wangeci Warui v Safaricom Limited [2020] eKLR
⚠ 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 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case