Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedJoint Petition dated 6th April, 2017· [2021] KEELRC 772 (KLR)

Isaack Mai Na Wakahiu & 21 others v Geothermal Development Co Ltd [2021] KEELRC 772 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
12 October 2021
HWHellen Wasilwa
1,847 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

#

Kenya's Employment Court ruled that workers on fixed-term contracts cannot claim unfair dismissal when their contracts simply expire as scheduled.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The 19 Petitioners, former labourers engaged in stone pitching, control building, afforestation, spring pond fencing, stores fuelling and masonry, filed a joint petition alleging unfair verbal termination of their employment and sought declarations that Articles 41(1) and 10(1) of the Constitution were infringed, compensation for the violations, and costs. They were engaged on hourly rates of Kshs. 42 or Kshs. 90 under short term contracts issued in April 2011, which they said were backdated. The Respondent admitted engaging nine of the Petitioners on casual, task-based terms and denied employing the rest, denying any dismissal. The matter proceeded by written submissions. The Petitioners argued the Respondent improperly reduced them to short term contracts and should have given notice and terminal dues on expiry, while the Respondent relied on the principle that fixed term contracts carry no expectation of renewal, and further objected that the Petition pleaded constitutional violations with insufficient precision and was time barred under section 90 of the Employment Act. The court framed four issues and found all Petitioners were engaged on casual short term fixed contracts of three or nine months without renewal clauses. It held the contracts ended by effluxion of time, that fixed term contracts carry no expectation of renewal, and that unfair termination was not established. Consequently no constitutional violation was made out and the petition was dismissed with no order of costs, delivered virtually on 12 October 2021 by Lady Justice Hellen Wasilwa.

Key legal issues

#
01

Nature of employment contract

Holding

All petitioners were engaged on casual short term fixed contracts of 3 or 9 months

Reasoning

The petitioners exhibited contracts, some dated and some undated, stipulating temporary employment for 3 or 9 months at hourly rates. The court found the contracts clear that engagement was on casual or temporary basis with no renewal clause, and rejected the respondent's claim that it only engaged some petitioners.

p. 4
02

Unfair termination

Holding

No unfair termination established; contracts ended by effluxion of time

Reasoning

The petitioners alleged verbal dismissal, but the court found the contracts were fixed term. On expiry the contracts lapsed by operation of time, and without a renewal clause the petitioners had no expectation of renewal. The allegation of verbal termination was found implausible.

p. 4
03

Breach of constitutional rights

Holding

No breach found given failure to establish unfair dismissal

Reasoning

Since the petitioners failed to establish unfair or unjust dismissal, the claim that constitutional rights were breached could not stand. The court nonetheless expressed the finding confusingly, stating constitutional rights were breached while also finding the case unestablished.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Fixed term contracts carry no expectation of renewal and end by effluxion of time

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The petition is dismissed for want of merit
  2. 2.No order of costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticles 41(1), 10(1), 47
  • Employment ActSection 90

Cases cited (9)

  • Kenya County Government Workers Union –v- Wajir County Government and another
    [2020] eKLR
  • Margaret A. Ochieng –v- National Water Conservation and Pipeline Corporation
    [2014] eKLR
  • George Onyango v. The Board of Directors Numerical Machining Complex Limited & Ors
    [2014] e-KLR
  • Bernard Wanjohi Muriuki v. Kirinyaga Water and Sanitation Company Limited & Ors
    Industrial Court Cause No. 1541 of 2010
  • Ruth Gathoni Ngotho-Kariuki v. The Presbytery Church of East Africa & Anor
    [2012] e-KLR
  • Frenchon v. The Secretary-General of the United Nations
    UNAT Case No. 2010-125
  • Godfrey Paul Okutoyi v Habil Olaka & another
    [2018] eKLR
  • Anarita Karimi Njeru v Republic (No.1)
    [1979] KLR 154
  • Meme v Republic & another
    [2004] 1 KLR 637
Jurisdiction invoked
Articles 41(1), 10(1), 47 of the Constitution of Kenya (as invoked by the Petitioners)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Isaack Mai Na Wakahiu & 21 others v Geothermal Development Co Ltd [2021] KEELRC 772 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Joint Petition dated 6th April, 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/772/eng@2021-10-12

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