Mahasin Elbashir Abdalla v Libya Oil Kenya Limited [2015] KEELRC 1245 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that a fixed-term contract simply ending is not unfair dismissal, but the employee still recovered USD 17,244 in contractual benefits.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the termination of the Claimant's services was unfair or whether the contract expired by affluxion of time
The contract expired by affluxion of time on 30/11/2011; there was no unfair termination
The contract dated 1/11/2010 was for one year, effective 1st December 2010, thus terminating on 30/11/2011. The letter of 14/10/2011 simply reminded the Claimant of the expiry and non-renewal. Renewal was at management discretion and required mutual consent; none of the termination/renewal provisions in paragraph 6 were invoked. The Claimant's assertion that non-renewal was linked to the Gaddafi regime was found to have no evidential support.
Entitlement to service pay
The Claimant is entitled to service pay of one month's remuneration (USD 5,000) for the one year served under paragraph 4(e) of the contract
Paragraph 4(e) provided for a 13th month payment representing one month's remuneration per year of service. The court held this was the service pay package for the year served with the Respondent. Claims for service pay for 18 years across other companies could not be loaded onto the Respondent absent proof of a corporate link or a contractual assumption of those obligations.
Refund of air ticket of USD 744 used after expiry of the contract
The Claimant is entitled to the refund of USD 744
The Claimant was barred from accessing the Respondent's premises from 23/11/2011, seven days before the contract expired. Within that week she would have exercised her right to use the ticket and was denied the opportunity, so the refund was due.
Refund of shipment and storage costs
Shipment charges of USD 11,500 awarded; USD 2,000 storage charges disallowed as not part of the agreement
Clause 4(d) required all shipping arrangements to be done and approved through and by the company. The Claimant delayed in responding to the Respondent's request for details, then shipped goods without approval and raised storage charges only after the expense was incurred. As no fraud was established and the goods were shipped, shipment charges were awarded less the storage component.
Legal principles established
#- A fixed-term contract which expires at the end of its stated term expires by affluxion of time and is not an unfair termination; renewal is at management's discretion unless consent of both parties is given
- Contractual benefits requiring employer approval must be pursued in accordance with the express conditions of the contract; an employee who ships goods without approval cannot recover costs outside the agreement
Court orders
#- 1.Payment of USD 11,500 as shipment charges
- 2.Payment of USD 5,000 being 13th month salary as service pay
- 3.Payment of USD 744 for the unutilized air ticket
- 4.Total award of USD 17,244
- 5.Issuance of a Certificate of Service to the Claimant
- 6.Respondent to pay costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court established under Article 162(2) of the Constitution (as the successor court hearing the cause originally filed in 2011)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mahasin Elbashir Abdalla v Libya Oil Kenya Limited [2015] KEELRC 1245 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Cause No. 1985 of 2011. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/1245/eng@2015-04-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.