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. 753 of 2014· [2020] KEELRC 610 (KLR)

Timothy Ikaale Kotol & 2 others v Mogotio Constituency Development Fund Committee & another [2020] KEELRC 610 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya
28 July 2020
2,860 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenyan workers kept on after a fixed-term contract ends gain full Employment Act protections, including the right to notice, reasons and a hearing before termination.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
In this first-instance ELRC cause at Nakuru, the 2nd claimant's claim was withdrawn by consent, as was the suit against the 2nd respondent. The 1st and 3rd claimants sued the Mogotio Constituency Development Fund Committee for notice pay, gratuity at 31% of annual basic pay, compensation for unfair termination and a certificate of service. They were employed on fixed term contracts (1st claimant from 2nd June 2008 for three years; 3rd claimant from 1st March 2011 for two years) which lapsed without renewal, but they continued serving until 30th May 2014 when, at a full committee meeting, they were verbally told their employment had terminated and to hand over duties. The defence was that the fixed term contracts simply lapsed and all dues, including gratuity, were paid. The court framed three issues: unfair termination, non-payment of gratuity, and remedies. It held that once the fixed term contracts lapsed and the claimants continued in service on a verbal contract without defined terms, they were protected under section 37 of the Employment Act and entitled to statutory protections. Termination without notice, reasons or hearing was unfair under sections 41, 43 and 45. On gratuity, the court found the respondent resolved to pay at 31% and paid it, directing the claimants to confirm with Skyline Sacco the disputed deposits and report to court within 14 days. Judgment was entered for notice pay (Ksh.12,000 and Ksh.18,000), compensation (Ksh.72,000 and Ksh.36,000), certificates of service and costs of the suit.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether there was unfair termination of employment

Holding

Yes - termination of the claimants' continued employment without notice, reasons or hearing was unfair under sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act

Reasoning

The claimants' fixed term contracts lapsed on 1st June 2011 and 28th February 2013, but they continued in service on a verbal contract, confirmed by the respondent's own meeting resolutions of 30th May 2014. Employees retained on verbal terms without defined conditions are protected under section 37 of the Act. Their employment was then terminated on 30th May 2014 without prior notice, valid reasons or a hearing, contrary to the mandatory provisions of sections 35, 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act.

p. 4
02

Whether gratuity remained unpaid

Holding

The respondent resolved to pay gratuity at 31% of annual basic pay and paid it; any balances allegedly deposited through Skyline Sacco are to be confirmed by the claimants with the Sacco and reported to the court

Reasoning

The respondent's meeting of 30th May 2014 resolved, on the employees' request, to pay gratuity at 31% of annual basic pay for the completed fixed term contracts. The claimants confirmed receiving cheques of Ksh.60,000 and Ksh.54,000 respectively. The respondent produced evidence of a cheque dated 7th October 2014 cashed on 10th October 2014 depositing Ksh.52,840 and Ksh.47,680 into their Skyline Sacco accounts. Since the claimants had accounts with the Sacco but had never checked them, they were directed to confirm the deposits and report to court within 14 days.

p. 5
03

What remedies should issue

Holding

Notice pay of one month under section 35, compensation of six months' gross wage for the 1st claimant and two months' for the 3rd claimant under section 49, and a certificate of service under section 51

Reasoning

Having found unfair termination, the court applied the statutory remedies. Notice pay of one month's pay was due under section 35 based on the last earned wages of Ksh.12,000 and Ksh.18,000. Compensation under section 49 was calibrated to the period each claimant served beyond the lapsed fixed term contracts under section 37 - six months' gross wage (Ksh.72,000) for the 1st claimant who served three years beyond, and two months' gross wage (Ksh.36,000) for the 3rd claimant who served one year beyond.

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a fixed term contract lapses but the employee continues in service on a verbal contract without defined terms, the employee is protected under section 37 of the Employment Act and enjoys the full statutory rights of an employee
  • An employer must prove valid and fair reasons for termination and follow the mandatory notification and hearing process under section 41 of the Employment Act before terminating employment of a protected employee

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Declaration that there was unfair termination of employment
  2. 2.1st claimant awarded notice pay Ksh.12,000 and compensation Ksh.72,000
  3. 3.3rd claimant awarded notice pay Ksh.18,000 and compensation Ksh.36,000
  4. 4.Claimants to be issued with a Certificate of Service pursuant to section 51 of the Employment Act
  5. 5.Claimants to report on their Skyline Sacco statement for the year 2014 within 14 days
  6. 6.Claimants awarded costs of the suit
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under Article 162(2) of the Constitution over employment and labour relations disputes

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Timothy Ikaale Kotol & 2 others v Mogotio Constituency Development Fund Committee & another [2020] KEELRC 610 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Cause No. 753 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2020/610/eng@2020-07-28

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