Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedCause No 2293 of 2012· [2013] KEELRC 771 (KLR)

Transport Workers Union v Hajji Issa Adams & Sons Limited [2013] KEELRC 771 (KLR)

Industrial Court of Kenya
17 September 2013
725 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled that a long-serving daily-paid worker was legally a casual employee, so he got only his underpaid wages and a certificate of service.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Transport Workers Union sued Hajji Issa Adams & Sons Limited on behalf of grievant Kevin Otieno Adipo, a spray painter employed from 11th September 1999 who was told upon return from unpaid leave in 2007 that his employment had terminated, with 12 days' pay as his final payment. The claim sought pay in lieu of notice, leave, service pay, salary underpayment, 12 months' compensation for unfair termination, and a certificate of service. The Respondent filed a Defence but did not appear at the hearing, which proceeded ex parte on 9th July 2013. The court identified the status of the grievant's employment as the first issue. Because the employment ended in 2007, before the Employment Act 2007 commenced on 2nd June 2008, the repealed Employment Act (Cap 226) applied. Under Section 2 of Cap 226, a casual employee is one paid at the end of each day and not engaged for longer than twenty-four hours at a time, terminable without notice under Section 14(5)(i). Finding that the grievant was paid a daily rate, the court held he was a casual employee not entitled to notice, leave or service pay; those claims were dismissed. The claim for underpayment of Kshs. 17,847.40 succeeded, as his daily rate of Kshs. 280 exceeded the applicable rate of Kshs. 249.90 for a general labourer. The court also directed issuance of a certificate of service and made no order for costs. The 12-month unfair termination compensation claim was not expressly addressed in the determination.

Key legal issues

#
01

Status of the grievant's employment and applicable statute

Holding

The grievant was a casual employee under Section 2 of the repealed Employment Act (Cap 226), not entitled to notice, leave or service pay; he was however underpaid.

Reasoning

The employment ended in 2007, before the Employment Act 2007 commenced on 2nd June 2008, so Cap 226 governed. Cap 226 defined a casual employee as one paid at the end of each day and not engaged for longer than twenty-four hours at a time, terminable at the close of any day without notice under Section 14(5)(i). The grievant was paid a daily rate, and Cap 226, unlike the 2007 Act, had no casual-to-term conversion provision. His daily rate of Kshs. 280 exceeded the applicable Kshs. 249.90 for a general labourer, so the underpayment claim succeeded.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where employment ended before 2nd June 2008, the applicable law is the repealed Employment Act (Cap 226), under which a daily-paid employee engaged for periods not exceeding twenty-four hours at a time is a casual employee not entitled to notice, leave or service pay.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The claim for pay in lieu of notice is dismissed
  2. 2.The claims for leave and service pay are dismissed
  3. 3.The claim for underpayment in the sum of Kshs. 17,847.40 succeeds and the Respondent is to pay it
  4. 4.The Respondent is directed to issue the grievant with a Certificate of Service
  5. 5.No order for costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 2 (repealed Employment Act, Cap 226 definition of casual employee)
  • Employment Act (Cap 226)Section 14(5)(i)
  • Employment Act, 2007commencement date (2nd June 2008)
Jurisdiction invoked
Trade dispute escalated to the Industrial Court by the Minister for Labour under the repealed labour machinery (conciliation by the Minister for Labour)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Transport Workers Union v Hajji Issa Adams & Sons Limited [2013] KEELRC 771 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Cause No 2293 of 2012. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2013/771/eng@2013-09-17

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