Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedCause No. 96 of 2002· [2003] KEELRC 14 (KLR)

KENYA BUILDING, CONSTRUCTION, TIMBER, FURNITURE & ALLIED INDUSTRIES EMPLOYEES’ UNION v MECOL LTD [2003] KEELRC 14 (KLR)

Industrial Court of Kenya
2 July 2003
CCCharles P. ChemmuttutJKJ.M. KilonzoAKA.K. Kerich
953 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

An employer who ignores a labour dispute at Kenya's Industrial Court will lose automatically — Mecol Ltd was ordered to pay Kshs.145,892 without contest.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is an ex-parte first-instance award of the Industrial Court of Kenya at Nairobi in a trade dispute referred to the Court on 5th December 2002 by the Minister for Labour under Section 8 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234. The Union, on behalf of grievant Geoffrey Wabwa, a labourer employed by Mecol Ltd on 26th October 1996, claimed unlawful dismissal and underpayment of wages. The Union alleged that on 22nd January 2000 the grievant, though unwell, was denied permission to seek medical attention, made to surrender his overall, handed his wages at the gate, and thereafter denied entry on the ground that he had resigned. The grievant was also allegedly underpaid against the collective agreement between the Furniture Manufacturers Group of F.K.E. and the Union, receiving Kshs.192.80 instead of Kshs.259.60 and later Kshs.297.60 per day. A formal dispute reported on 19th October 2000 was investigated, and the Minister found the dismissal of the grievant, who had a clean employment record, harsh, recommending normal termination with full terminal benefits and compensation; the Company rejected the recommendation. The Company filed no reply memorandum and made no appearance at the hearing, so the dispute was heard ex-parte. The Court granted the Union's unchallenged claim of Kshs.145,892.00, comprising notice pay, leave pay, CBA underpayment arrears and maximum compensation of twelve months under Section 15(1)(ii) of the Act, and ordered payment within thirty days.

Key legal issues

#
01

Unlawful dismissal of the grievant

Holding

The claim, founded on the Minister's investigation finding the dismissal harsh, was unopposed and therefore granted in full.

Reasoning

The Union alleged the grievant, a labourer with a clean record since 1996, was denied permission to seek medical attention, made to surrender his overall and handed his wages at the gate on 22nd January 2000, and denied entry on 24th January on the ground that he had resigned. The Minister's Investigator found the dismissal harsh and recommended normal termination with full benefits and compensation. The Company filed no reply and made no appearance, so the claim stood unchallenged.

p. 2
02

Underpayment of wages under the collective agreement

Holding

Underpayment for the periods 1st May 1998 to 30th April 1999 and 1st May 1999 to 30th April 2000 was included in the unchallenged quantum awarded.

Reasoning

The Union demonstrated that the grievant received a consolidated daily wage of Kshs.192.80 instead of the applicable CBA rates of Kshs.259.60 and Kshs.297.60 for successive periods. The Company, which was bound by the collective agreement between the Furniture Manufacturers Group of F.K.E. and the Union until 22nd January 2002, did not controvert the figures or the claim generally, having failed to file a reply memorandum or appear at the hearing.

p. 2
03

Quantum of compensation under Section 15(1)(ii) of the Trade Disputes Act

Holding

Maximum compensation of 12 months' wages under Section 15(1)(ii) of the Act was awarded as prayed.

Reasoning

The Union prayed for maximum compensation of twelve months in accordance with Section 15(1)(ii) of the Act, computed at Kshs.297.60 per day for 26 days over 12 months, amounting to Kshs.92,851.20. Together with notice pay, leave and underpayment arrears, the total awarded was Kshs.145,892.00. Because the demand stood unchallenged, the Court granted the full amount and ordered payment within thirty days.

Legal principles established

#
  • An unchallenged claim before the Industrial Court stands admitted and will be granted as prayed.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Company is ordered to pay the grievant Kshs.145,892.00 in terminal benefits and maximum compensation within thirty (30) days from the date of the award

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234, Laws of KenyaSection 8
  • Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234, Laws of KenyaSection 14(9)(e) and (f)
  • Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234, Laws of KenyaSection 15(1)(ii)
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 8 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234, Laws of Kenya (Minister for Labour's reference)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "KENYA BUILDING, CONSTRUCTION, TIMBER, FURNITURE & ALLIED INDUSTRIES EMPLOYEES’ UNION v MECOL LTD [2003] KEELRC 14 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2003). Cause No. 96 of 2002. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2003/14/eng@2003-07-02

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.