Thomas M. Nguti & 196 others v Kenya Railways Corporation [2020] KEELRC 251 (KLR)
The bottom line
#197 former Kenya Railways workers won salary arrears and a 25% award back-pay, but their unfair dismissal claim failed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#When the claimants' employment ended
The employment of all claimants is deemed to have subsisted until 8th May 2010, when the Court of Appeal's 12-month suspension of the dismissal letter lapsed
The High Court nullified the dismissal letters on 26th September 2003; the Court of Appeal on appeal set aside orders 1, 2 and 6, substituted suspension of the 30th April 2003 letter for nullification, and limited the life of orders 3, 4 and 5 (suspension) to 12 months. Since neither party sought extension, the employment ended by effluxion of that period. Consequently, fairness of termination was not a live issue.
Whether the Court Award in Industrial Court Cause No. 72 of 1995 was implemented
The Court Award, granting locomotive drivers a 25% salary increase for 1st January 1996 to 31st December 1997, was never implemented
RW1's evidence on salary increases related to periods before the award and to CBA reviews covering all unionisable employees, not the award specific to locomotive drivers. He contradicted himself, claiming implementation of an award yet to be delivered. No documents proved implementation of the gazetted award, so the claimants are entitled to the 25% increment over and above CBA increases.
Whether the claimants were unfairly terminated
No finding of unfair termination; the employment ended by lapsing of the Court of Appeal orders, not by an unfair act of the respondent
The court held that it was for the respondent, as the party whose dismissal letter had been nullified and suspended, to lift the suspension or end the employment otherwise. Having failed to do so, the employments terminated by lapsing of the orders, which cannot be characterised as unfair termination by the respondent.
Legal principles established
#- An employee regarded as having forfeited appointment for absence without leave for more than seven continuous days under Section G13(e) of the Kenya Railways Personnel Regulations 1988 is deemed dismissed in accordance with those Regulations.
- Where a dismissal letter is nullified and substituted with a time-limited suspension of the employment, the employment lapses upon expiry of that period rather than being unfairly terminated.
- A party alleging non-implementation of a court award must prove implementation; absence of evidence of implementation supports a finding of non-implementation.
Court orders
#- 1.Finding that the respondent did not implement the Court Award in Cause No. 72 of 1995
- 2.Declaration that the claimants are entitled to salary arrears of 25% loaded on their salaries as at 1st January 1996 in addition to any increase arising from CBA increments
- 3.Finding that the claimants are deemed to have been in employment up to 8th May 2010
- 4.Direction that the respondent tabulate and pay salary arrears for the claimants from 30th April 2003 to 8th May 2010, factoring in the Court Award in Cause No. 72 of 1995
- 5.Order that the respondent pay interest on the decretal sum at court rates from 8th May 2009 until payment in full
- 6.Direction that the respondent tabulate the amount payable and forward it to the Claimants' Counsel for approval within 30 days from the date of judgment
- 7.Mention on 16th December 2020 to confirm compliance
- 8.Respondent to pay claimants' costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Act over employment causes
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- AGL Kenya Limited (Formerly Bollore Transport and Logistics Kenya Limited) v Abdalla (Appeal E070 of 2024) [2024] KEELRC 2085 (KLR)[2024] KEELRC 2085 (KLR)4 Jul 2024
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Thomas M. Nguti & 196 others v Kenya Railways Corporation [2020] KEELRC 251 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Cause No. 803 of 2013 (Formerly Nairobi HCCC 398 of 2003). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2020/251/eng@2020-11-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.