Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in judgment (transferred from High Court by order of Muya J dated 19 February 2013)· [2013] KEELRC 783 (KLR)

Elisha Kirigha Gezzam Aka Elisha Kiriga Gezzam Mwambi v Brooke Bond Kenya Ltd [2013] KEELRC 783 (KLR)

Industrial Court of Kenya
27 September 2013
1,639 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, employed by the Respondent from 16 May 1972 and rising to Factory Maintenance Supervisor, was declared redundant by letter dated 2 July 2002 at age 58. He received Kshs 1,499,184 as compensation for loss of office, Kshs 3,132,841 from the Retirement Saving Scheme and Kshs 68,280 for outstanding leave. He sued claiming Kshs 2,979,697.50 as terminal benefits at 1.5 months' pay per year of service, contending that the payment received was contractual compensation for loss of office, distinct from statutory severance pay under section 16A(1)(f) of the repealed Employment Act, and that he was entitled to both. The Respondent maintained that redundancy payment and terminal benefits were not distinct, and that the Claimant had been paid all his dues. The Cause, transferred from the High Court by Muya J on 19 February 2013, was determined on the basis of written submissions by agreement under rule 21 of the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules, 2010. The court framed two issues: whether redundancy payment and terminal benefits are separate and distinct, and whether the Claimant established a basis for relief. Holding that severance pay is a species of terminal benefits, and that the Claimant produced no policy document, staff manual or redundancy letter to establish a contractual entitlement, the court computed the statutory severance entitlement at Kshs 1,093,155 - less than the Kshs 1,499,184 actually paid. The Claimant therefore suffered no loss. An unauthorised Statement of Claim filed on 22 July 2013 was expunged. The Cause was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether severance pay (redundancy payment) and terminal benefits are separate and distinct entitlements

Holding

They are not distinct; severance pay is a species of terminal benefits. The statute uses the term severance pay for payments to an employee declared redundant.

Reasoning

The court found the parties' use of 'redundancy payment' imprecise since the repealed Employment Act used the statutory term 'severance pay'. Terminal benefits was not defined in the repealed Act and is a general term denoting the sum total of all payments made on termination of employment. Severance pay, being a term of art for the specific payment due upon involuntary termination without fault by the employee, falls within terminal benefits generally.

p. 3
02

Whether the Claimant established a contractual basis for the claim

Holding

No - the Claimant did not place sufficient material before the Court to establish that his claim was based on contract.

Reasoning

Although the Claimant argued the payment of Kshs 1,499,184 was contractual as it resulted from negotiations, neither party produced any policy document or staff manual setting out the agreed redundancy terms, and even the redundancy declaration letter was not produced. Without documentary proof of a contractual entitlement beyond the statutory minimum, the contractual foundation of the claim failed.

p. 3
03

Whether the Claimant was entitled to severance pay over and above the Kshs 1,499,184 already paid

Holding

No - the correct statutory formula would have yielded Kshs 1,093,155, less than what was actually paid, so the Claimant suffered no loss.

Reasoning

Under section 16A(1)(f) of the repealed Employment Act, severance pay is payable at not less than 15 days' pay per completed year of service. Applying the correct formula (daily rate multiplied by 450 days for 30 years of service), the entitlement would be Kshs 1,093,155, below the Kshs 1,499,184 paid. The Respondent's more generous formula, even if statutorily non-compliant, left the Claimant without prejudice.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Severance pay is a species of terminal benefits; terminal benefits is a general term denoting all payments made to an employee on termination of employment, while severance pay is the specific statutory payment due to an employee declared redundant
  • The statutory severance pay rate of not less than 15 days' pay for each completed year of service sets an irreducible minimum

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Claimant's unfiled 'Statement of Claim' filed on 22 July 2013 without leave of Court is expunged from the records of the Court
  2. 2.The Cause is dismissed with no order as to costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment Act (repealed)Section 16A(1)(f)
  • Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules, 2010Rule 21
Jurisdiction invoked
Order of Muya J of the High Court dated 19 February 2013 transferring the file to the Industrial Court, which has exclusive jurisdiction over employment and labour matters

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Elisha Kirigha Gezzam Aka Elisha Kiriga Gezzam Mwambi v Brooke Bond Kenya Ltd [2013] KEELRC 783 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Not stated in judgment (transferred from High Court by order of Muya J dated 19 February 2013). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2013/783/eng@2013-09-27

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