Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedAppeal No. 45 of 2017· [2021] KEELRC 1262 (KLR)

Egerton University v John Marani [2021] KEELRC 1262 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya
8 July 2021
HWHellen Wasilwa
1,873 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 confirmed that Egerton University must pay a former employee's terminal dues because it cannot use a court's jurisdiction only when it suits it.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Egerton University appealed against the judgment of Hon. J. Mwaniki, Chief Magistrate, delivered on 25 March 2014 in Nakuru CMCC No. 1321 of 2007, insofar as it allowed the respondent's counterclaim. The university had sued the respondent, its former employee, to recover Kshs. 393,130/- paid irregularly into his account; the respondent denied the claim and by amended defence filed a counterclaim for terminal benefits for unfair termination of 16 October 2006. The trial court found for the plaintiff on the claim and partly for the defendant on the counterclaim, awarding Kshs. 586,770/-, set off against the plaintiff's award with the balance of Kshs. 193,640/- payable by the plaintiff. The appeal proceeded by written submissions. The appellant argued the magistrate lacked jurisdiction over the counterclaim given Article 162(2) of the Constitution, that the counterclaim was unproved and based on unpleaded figures contrary to sections 107 to 109 of the Evidence Act, and that the claim was time-barred under section 90 of the Employment Act. The respondent relied on the transitional provisions in section 22, Part 5 of the Sixth Schedule, and on his internal appeal against dismissal decided on 18 December 2008. The court framed two issues: jurisdiction over the counterclaim and proof of the counterclaim. It held the magistrate had jurisdiction because the university had itself submitted to the magistrate's court and obtained judgment there, estopping it from denying jurisdiction over the interrelated counterclaim, and found the counterclaim proved with evidence of dismissal without due process. The appeal was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Chief Magistrate's Court had jurisdiction to entertain the counterclaim in an employment dispute after the promulgation of the Constitution of Kenya 2010

Holding

The magistrate had jurisdiction; the appellant, having invoked the same court's jurisdiction for its own claim arising from the employment relationship, was estopped from denying jurisdiction over the related counterclaim, and transitional provisions allowed pending matters to proceed.

Reasoning

The cause was filed on 3 October 2007, before the 2010 Constitution. The dispute emanated from an employer-employee relationship, but the appellant itself subjected the matter to the magistrate's court and obtained judgment on its claim. The respondent relied on the transitional provisions in the Sixth Schedule permitting matters pending under the old procedure to proceed to conclusion. Having benefited from the magistrate's jurisdiction, the appellant could not resist the counterclaim on jurisdictional grounds.

p. 3
02

Whether the counterclaim for terminal benefits following unfair termination was proved

Holding

The counterclaim was proved; the respondent gave evidence of dismissal without due process and the magistrate properly computed the terminal dues of Kshs. 586,770/=, set off against the appellant's award.

Reasoning

The appellant contended the counterclaim was not pleaded or proved and that the court used unsubstantiated figures. The court found the respondent had responded to the counterclaim, led evidence of dismissal without due process, and that the magistrate considered the submissions in computing the dues. There was evidence on the termination and entitlement to terminal dues, so no error was established.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A party who submits to the jurisdiction of a court and obtains judgment in its favour is estopped from later pleading that the same court lacked jurisdiction over an interrelated counterclaim.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya 2010Article 162(2)
  • Constitution of Kenya 2010Article 262, Sixth Schedule, section 22 of Part 5
  • Evidence ActSections 107 to 109
  • Employment ActSection 90
  • Trade Dispute Act Cap 234Repealed (established the Industrial Court of Kenya)

Cases cited (2)

  • Owners of Motor Vessels 'Lillian S' v Caltex Oil Kenya Limited
    [1989] KLR 1
  • Philip Muiruri v Gatemu Housing Co. Ltd
    [2019] eKLR
On appeal from
Chief Magistrate's Court at Nakuru
Nakuru CMCC No. 1321 of 2007
Jurisdiction invoked
Appellate jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court over appeals from subordinate courts in employment matters

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Egerton University v John Marani [2021] KEELRC 1262 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Appeal No. 45 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/1262/eng@2021-07-08

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