Kenya Flourspar Limited v Moses Segite [2017] KEELRC 1970 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court upheld a finding of wrongful redundancy but slashed the employee's award, confirming only severance pay where claims lack evidence.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the redundancy was wrongful
The redundancy was wrongful because there was no demonstration that the collective bargaining agreement's requirements of prior Union consultation and consent were satisfied; the Appellant led no evidence to rebut
The Respondent testified that the CBA required prior consultations with the Union before redundancies and that he never consented to voluntary redundancy. The Appellant led no evidence at trial. The court held the Respondent proved wrongful redundancy on a balance of probabilities, dismissing Grounds 1 and 2 of the appeal.
Entitlement to terminal benefits under the CBA
The trial court's award of Kshs 728,277/50 was erroneous; the CBA provided 30 days' pay per completed year of service and the Appellant's computation was mathematically correct
Clause 16(d)(iv) read with 6(c)(iv) entitled employees with over 10 years' service to 30 days' pay per completed year. The Respondent served about 12 years at Kshs 5,955 per month and was already paid Kshs 76,354. His claim of Kshs 641,655 did not add mathematically, being roughly 12 months' wages (1 month per year).
Severance pay
Severance pay of Kshs 285,180 was properly awardable as a statutory entitlement on redundancy
The court held that under the statutory framework at the material time, severance pay was an entitlement due to an employee whose position was declared redundant, so the trial court could not be faulted for awarding the amount claimed.
Heads of claim lacking evidential foundation (8 months' salary; 6 months' terminal package; leave travelling allowance)
The trial court erred in awarding these heads as no evidential basis was laid
The 8 months' salary claim had no evidential basis and the trial record was inconclusive on the period it covered. The 6-month terminal package had no foundation. The leave travelling allowance claim of Kshs 33,600 contradicted the Respondent's own evidence of Kshs 1,600 and the CBA rate of Kshs 1,610.
Legal principles established
#- A first appellate court must re-evaluate the evidence and reach its own conclusions, making due allowance for not having seen or heard the witnesses
- Where an employee testifies to non-compliance with a collective bargaining agreement before redundancy, the employer bears an evidential burden to controvert that testimony
- Severance pay is a statutory entitlement due to an employee whose position is declared redundant
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal allowed
- 2.Trial Court judgment set aside
- 3.Finding that there was wrongful termination of employment through redundancy
- 4.Award of severance pay of Kshs 285,180/42 to the Respondent
- 5.Each party to bear own costs of the appeal
- On appeal from
- Chief Magistrates' Court (suit transferred from High Court, Eldoret)
- High Court Civil Case No. 94 of 2000
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction; the High Court directed transfer of the appeal to this Court citing jurisdiction
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Flourspar Limited v Moses Segite [2017] KEELRC 1970 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Appeal from Eldoret High Court Civil Case No. 94 of 2000 (Memorandum of Appeal filed 18 August 2008). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2017/1970/eng@2017-09-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.