Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Appeals
The appellant appealed against the dismissal of her suit alleging unfair termination by the respondent, seeking compensation and terminal dues. The court found that the appellant did not desert her employment but was suspended on half pay due to the respondent's suspension letter dated 9th April 2020, which was later suspended from 1st June 2020 due to financial constraints caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. The court held that the suspension did not constitute constructive dismissal or desertion, as the intended disciplinary process was delayed by the pandemic, and the appellant terminated her contract by filing suit on 6th October 2020. The court awarded her full salary from 1st June 2020 to 6th October 2020 and half salary for April and May 2020, but dismissed her claim for unlawful termination and damages.
employment lawconstructive dismissaldesertionsuspension10 min read
JudgmentGlobal Hope Network International VS Hellen Diramu Boru
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Appeals
The appellant moved for dismissal of the respondent’s forgotten suit for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The trial court dismissed the motion, directing the suit to proceed to pre-trial conference and hearing within six weeks. The appellant appealed, arguing the respondent’s three-year delay was inordinate and inexcusable, while the respondent claimed the appellant was precluded from filing the motion due to lack of service. The court found the delay inordinate and inexcusable due to the respondent’s admission of forgetting the suit, and the appellant was not precluded from filing the motion as it was a party to the suit.
civil procedure rulesdismissal for want of prosecutioninordinate delayservice of summons10 min read
JudgmentWest Build General Contractors Limited VS Patrick Nyaga Njuki
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Appeals
The court considered whether the appellant was the respondent’s employer or a paymaster for the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. The appeal challenged the lower court’s finding that the appellant was the employer and liable for unlawful termination. The court found the appellant was a paymaster, not the employer, as the Ministry terminated the contract, leading to redundancy. The court rejected the respondent’s claim for compensation due to the appellant’s agency relationship with the Ministry and the Arbitral Award confirming the Ministry’s liability.
employment actredundancypaymastertermination of employment19 min read
JudgmentDENNIS WAITHAKA NGOCI VS BROADVIEW SECURITY LIMITED
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Appeals
The court dismissed the respondent’s Notice of Motion seeking urgent certification, ex-parte hearing, stay of execution, setting aside the March 8, 2024 judgment, and other orders. The respondent claimed it was unaware of proceedings until served with execution documents on November 29, 2024, but the court found it had been served with initial pleadings and entered appearance in the lower court. The court held the motion failed due to the respondent’s admission of service and waiver of rights, as it had been duly served with appeal documents and failed to participate. The motion was dismissed with costs.
notice of motionex-parte hearingstay of executionsetting aside judgment4 min read
JudgmentFlamingo Horticulture Kenya Limited VS Stanley Mbaabu M'mbui
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Appeals
The court granted an application for stay of proceedings in the Chief Magistrates Court at Meru Employment and Labour Relations Court case No. E005 of 2024 between Stanley Mbaabu M’mbui and Flamingo Horticulture Kenya Limited, pending the hearing and determination of an appeal against the lower court's dismissal of the motion. The applicant sought stay to prevent the lower court proceedings from proceeding while the appeal was pending, arguing that the appeal would be rendered nugatory if the stay was not granted. The court found that the appeal was not frivolous and that the application for stay was filed expeditiously, meeting the criteria for granting stay under the principles outlined in William Odhiambo Ramogi v Attorney General (2019) eKLR.
stay of proceedingsappealemployment lawwork injury benefit act4 min read
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Miscellaneous Applications
The court reviewed a ruling where it adopted a DOSH assessment of Kshs.638,214.05 plus costs and interest. The respondent (judgment debtor) challenged this by seeking to discount Kshs.477,042 from the award, arguing the medical expenses were paid by the employer but not by the respondent. The court found an error on the face of the record because the Replying Affidavit did not show the respondent underwent a second medical examination that reduced the award to Kshs.370,225. The court discounted the disputed sum, ruling that the respondent did not prove payment of the medical expenses, and allowed the motion with each party bearing their own costs.
occupational safety and healthreview of judgmentunjust enrichmentmedical expenses5 min read
JudgmentDavid Guantai Mwambia VS Kenya Power & Lighting Company Ltd
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Miscellaneous Applications
The court dismissed the respondent's preliminary objection to the applicant's motion seeking to adopt and enforce a Work Injury Benefits Act (WIBA) award made by the Director of Occupational Health and Safety Services (DOSH). The court found jurisdiction to recognize and enforce DOSH awards under section 52(2) of WIBA, citing its authority as the court with jurisdiction over employment and labour relations claims. The court also held that the DOSH/WIBA Form 4, signed by a Senior OSH Officer and stamped by the County OSH Officer, was valid as per section 53 of WIBA, and the respondent failed to challenge or pay the awarded sum of Kshs.16,456,400.64 despite being notified. The court granted the applicant's prayer for costs and interest at court rates.
work injury benefits actenforcement of awardsjurisdictiondosh forms6 min read
JudgmentJeniffer Kinya Simon VS Teachers Service Commission
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Miscellaneous Applications
The court dismissed the applicant's motion seeking to adopt the original DOSH assessment of Kshs.7,665,641.74 from 17th March 2022, as the respondent had successfully challenged it under section 51 of the WIBA Act, leading to a re-evaluation that reduced the permanent disability from 80% to 60% and the compensation amount to Kshs.4,834,022.40. The court found the original assessment no longer valid due to the successful objection and subsequent review, and struck out the motion without ordering costs since the respondent had not fully settled the new award. The applicant was free to move the court for further relief.
work injury benefits actpermanent disabilitydosh assessmentcompensation review4 min read
JudgmentTarasila Gaicugi Iburi VS Agricultural Employers
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Appeals
The court upheld the termination of the appellant's employment as lawful and fair, finding that the appellant was served with a show cause letter on 19th October 2020 and invited to a disciplinary hearing on 23rd October 2020, but she refused to acknowledge the letter or attend the hearing. The court determined that the termination followed fair procedure and was for a valid reason (repeated misconduct), and the appellant's claim for unfair termination was dismissed with costs.
employment terminationshow cause letterdisciplinary hearingfair procedure13 min read
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Miscellaneous Applications
The court granted the applicant's motion for a declaration that the respondent pay Kshs.642,265.50 compensation as awarded by the Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services, adopted as court judgment, and costs with interest. The court found it had jurisdiction over WIBA matters, the discharge voucher was conditional and not a binding settlement, thus the applicant's claim for the full award was upheld minus the Kshs.101,397 paid under the discharge voucher.
wibacompensationdischarge voucherpermanent incapacity4 min read
JudgmentSalesio Mung'athia VS State Law AND Registrar Of Trade Unions
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Appeals
The appellant appealed against the dismissal of their suit for being time barred, arguing that the trial court erred in law and fact by dismissing the suit as statute barred despite having granted leave to file out of time. The court determined that the cause of action arose in 2004 when the appellant received the dismissal letter, and under section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act, the limitation period was six years, expiring on 8th October 2010. The court held that the suit was statute barred as it was filed after the limitation period lapsed, and the trial court lacked jurisdiction to extend the limitation period. The appeal was dismissed with costs.
statute barlimitation periodemployment contractdismissal7 min read
JudgmentDavid Guantai Mwambia VS Kenya Power & Lighting Company Ltd
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Miscellaneous Applications
The court dismissed the respondent's preliminary objection to the applicant's motion for adoption of a Work Injury Benefit Act (WIBA) award. The court held that it has jurisdiction to enforce DOSH awards where the award has not been challenged under section 51 and 52 of WIBA, as the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act confers original jurisdiction over employment disputes. The court found the application not fatally defective because the DOSH award form, though lacking an official stamp, was signed by a Senior Occupational Safety and Health Officer and the omission could be cured by submitting a stamped copy. The court rejected the respondent's arguments that the court lacks jurisdiction or that the award was invalid due to the absence of a DOSH stamp, citing that the form's wording does not require the Director to sign it and that the omission does not affect the validity of the award.
work injury benefit actdirector of safety and healthjurisdictionenforcement of awards4 min read
JudgmentMbogo & Muriuki Advocate VS County Government Of Isiolo
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Miscellaneous Applications
The applicant, MBOGO & MURIUKI ADVOCATES, sought judgment against the County Government of Isiolo for taxed costs of Kshs.24,304,693, interest at 14% per annum from taxation date, and costs of the application. The respondent opposed, citing a reference filed 24th January 2025 as a ground to halt the application. The court held the reference time-barred as it was filed 48 days after the taxing officer's decision, and the applicant's application was allowed for judgment on costs with interest and costs of the application.
advocates actcosts certificationtaxing officertime bar4 min read
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Miscellaneous Applications
The court, presided over by Hon. Justice Onesmus N Makau, ruled on an application by Abraham Zakayo (Applicant) against Timafrol Limited (Respondent) seeking enforcement of a Kshs.638,214.05 compensation award from the Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services. The Applicant claimed the Respondent failed to pay the award after being notified, while the Respondent argued it reduced the award to Kshs.370,225.00 via a second medical review and paid it. The court found no evidence of the second medical review or payment, holding the Respondent must pay the original award with interest, costs, and jurisdiction was upheld under the Employment and Labour Relations (ELRC) Act.
employment and labour relationscompensation awardoccupational safety and healthwiba3 min read
JudgmentCHARLES MURIITHI NJOKA VS EMBU COUNTY GOVERNMENT
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Appeals
The court granted a stay of execution pending appeal for the respondent (Embu County Government) to deposit Kshs. 4,831,525 in a joint interest-earning account within 45 days, ensuring the appellant (Charles Muriithi Njoka) could not be reinstated without the appeal being rendered nugatory. The court found the application met the legal threshold under Order 42 Rule 6(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, as the delay in filing was not unreasonable and the risk of the appeal becoming nugatory due to reinstatement was substantial. The court ordered the respondent to provide security to balance the competing interests, avoiding the risk of the decretal sum being lost if the appeal succeeded.
stay of executionappealreinstatementdecretal sum5 min read
JudgmentSimon Mutuma VS China State Construstion Engineering Corp. (k) Ltd
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Meru ELRCOnesmus Makau
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations Court·Miscellaneous Applications
The court allowed the applicant's motion seeking declaration that the respondent pay the compensation award of Kshs201,344.00 by the Director of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH), adoption of the award as court judgment, and costs. The court found jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations (ELRC) Act and determined the applicant was employed by the respondent based on DOSH Form 1 evidence, which authenticated the employment relationship and injury details. The court rejected the respondent's argument that it lacked jurisdiction or that the applicant was not an employee.
employment and labour relationswork injury benefits actdosh form 1employment relationship3 min read
We use strictly necessary cookies to run the site. With your consent we also use performance cookies to understand how the site is used. Read the cookie policy.