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

Metto v Uasin Gishu County Public Service Board & 3 others (Cause 35 of 2020) [2023] KEELRC 363 (KLR) (3 February 2023) (Judgment)

[2023] KEELRC 363 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
363
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 363 (KLR)
Decided
3 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

TypeLabor DisputePostureAppeal from the original trialCoramNJ ABUODHA
The Court awards the claimant non-practicing allowance for the five years he worked for the respondent, totaling Ksh 1,800,000/=, subject to taxes and statutory deductions.

Facts

Sylvester Kipkemai Metto was employed by the County Government of Uasin Gishu as a public officer from September 2, 2013, until September 5, 2017. He was terminated without notice and was seeking unpaid emoluments and declarations.

Issues

  • Whether the termination of employment was lawful
  • Whether the reduction in salary was lawful
  • Whether the claimant was entitled to non-practicing allowance

Reasoning

The Court found that the claimant was a senior officer in the County Government and was entitled to non-practicing allowance. The reduction in salary was lawful as it was outside the formal structure for payment of salaries to public officers.

Outcome

Claimant partially successful

Orders

  • Award of non-practicing allowance of Ksh 1,800,000/= subject to taxes and statutory deductions

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Interpretation and General Provisions Act
  • Employment Act
  • Constitution of Kenya 2010
⚠ 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