Employment and Labour Relations Court
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtMiscellaneous 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.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtMiscellaneous 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.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtMiscellaneous 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 The court found the original assessment no longer valid due to the successful objection and subsequent review, and struck out the motion without ordering costs since the respondent had not fully settled the new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.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court dismissed the respondent's Notice of Motion seeking to set aside court orders issued on 13th November 2024, as the respondent was duly served with the court process but failed to respond to the petitioners' motion. The court found the impugned interim orders regular because the respondents were served and attended court through their counsel, who sought 21 days to file a response before the hearing. The respondent's argument that the union was financially unable to comply with the orders due to TSC's failure to remit dues was not relevant to the procedural irregularity. The court held that the respondent was not condemned unheard as they had been served and had the opportunity to respond, thus the motion was dismissed with costs.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
This ruling addresses the 2nd respondent's preliminary objection to a public interest litigation petition filed by the petitioner on behalf of residents of Isiolo County. The court found that the petitioner lacked locus standi to bring the petition as he is not an employer, employee, or party directly involved in the employment relationship, and had not met the public interest litigation threshold under Article 22 of the Constitution. The court also noted that the petitioner failed to file submissions opposing the preliminary objection despite being notified, and the 2nd respondent's objection was allowed with costs declined due to the petition being a public interest litigation. The court ruled that the petition should be struck out as the petitioner lacked jurisdictional standing and did not demonstrate sufficient interest in the labour relationship to invoke the court's jurisdiction.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtMiscellaneous 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.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtMiscellaneous 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.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtMiscellaneous 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.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court held that the petitioners' constitutional rights were infringed by the respondents' actions, including non-payment of salaries and casual employment for over five years. The court found the petitioners had not exhausted internal appeal mechanisms under section 77 of the County Governments Act, which requires appealing to the Public Service Commission before court action. The court dismissed the petition with costs to the respondents, ruling that jurisdiction was ousted by the PSC's exclusive authority over employment disputes under the County Governments Act and the Public Service Commission Act.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtMiscellaneous 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.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtMiscellaneous 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.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court addressed a petition by ABDI ADAN against the INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND BOUNDARIES COMMISSION (IEBC) regarding constitutional violations and disciplinary proceedings. The petitioner alleged that the IEBC improperly constituted a disciplinary committee, violated Articles 41, 47, 50, and 236 of the Constitution, and unlawfully demoted him without due process. The court found the disciplinary proceedings unconstitutional due to improper quorum and misapplication of the Commission Disciplinary Committee (CDC) instead of the HRMAC for staff in Job Grade 5 and below, as per the IEBC HR Manual. The court ordered reinstatement, restoration of rank, salary, and benefits, and restrained further disciplinary actions.