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

Mohamed v Wazito Football Club (Cause 814 of 2019) [2023] KEELRC 389 (KLR) (9 February 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEELRC 389 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
389
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 389 (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

TypeEmployment DisputePosturePreliminary Objection Dismissed, Suit Proceeds to HearingCoramMN NDUMA
The Court dismisses the preliminary objection and allows the suit to proceed to hearing.

Facts

Hussein Mohamed was employed as a Coach by Wazito Football Club on November 2, 2018. His employment was terminated on March 7, 2019. Mohamed alleged the termination was unlawful and unfair, and sought compensation and terminal benefits. Wazito filed a preliminary objection based on the Football Kenya Federation Constitution, arguing the Court lacked jurisdiction.

Issues

  • Jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court
  • Applicability of the Football Kenya Federation Constitution

Reasoning

The Court finds that the parties opted out of the Football Kenya Federation Constitution's dispute resolution mechanisms by agreeing to a contract clause that allows for negotiation and legal remedies if negotiations fail.

Outcome

Suit Proceeds to Hearing

Orders

  • Preliminary Objection Dismissed

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Football Kenya Federation Constitution, 2017
  • FIFA Statutes
Cases cited (1)
  • Kenya Chemical and Allied Workers Union v Bamburi Cement Limited (2017) 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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case