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

Mumina v Development Bank of Kenya Limited (Cause 892 of 2012) [2013] KEIC 581 (KLR) (11 December 2013) (Judgment)

[2013] KEIC 581 (KLR) Industrial Court
Read PDF
Court
Industrial Court
Case number
581
Citation
[2013] KEIC 581 (KLR)
Decided
11 December 2013
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeWrongful TerminationPostureAppeal from an original trialCoramNZIOKI WA MAKAU
Holding

The redundancy pay for the 18 years' service to SEFCO is ordered to be paid by the Respondent.

Facts

Claimant Irene Mumina worked for SEFCO, a subsidiary of the Respondent, from 1986 to 2004. She was absorbed by the Respondent in 2004. She claimed dues for her 18 years' service to SEFCO and 3 years' service to the Respondent.

Issues

  1. Whether the Employment Act 2007 or the Employment Act Cap 226 applies to the case.
  2. Whether the Respondent is liable for the Claimant's 18 years' service to SEFCO.
  3. Whether the Claimant's contract was properly terminated by euxion of time.

Reasoning

The overlay of the two companies does not accord with acceptable practice. The redundancy was under SEFCO, but the Claimant did not join SEFCO. The Respondent assumed liability for the Claimant's leave days and gratuity for the months in 2004, which were liabilities of the former employer SEFCO.

Outcome

Claimant's 18 years' service to SEFCO is ordered to be paid by the Respondent.

Orders

  • Order that the redundancy pay for the 18 years' service to SEFCO be paid by the Respondent.

Remedies

  • Redundancy pay for the 18 years' service to SEFCO.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Trade Disputes Act (now repealed)
Cases cited (1)
  • Salomon v. Salomon & Co. All ER 1895 - 1899
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.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case