Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedNot stated in judgment· [2021] KEELRC 1488 (KLR)

Raphael Njuguna Kuria v Seven Seas Technologies Group Limited [2021] KEELRC 1488 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
29 March 2021
1,934 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ordered an employer to pay over Ksh.1.19 million in admitted terminal dues immediately, rejecting instalment requests because wages cannot wait.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant, formerly employed by the respondent as Group Finance Manager from 5th September 2016 on a basic salary of Ksh.355,000 with airtime and fuel allowances, resigned on 6th September 2019 due to non-payment of salary. By letter dated 19th March 2019 the respondent admitted owing him terminal dues of Ksh.1,192,544.95 less statutory deductions and proposed payment in 18 monthly instalments of Ksh.63,252, but only two instalments were paid, leaving a balance of Ksh.1,013,528.03. The claimant applied under Rule 17(1) and (8) of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules, 2016 for judgment on admission. The respondent, through its CEO Michael King'ori Macharia, acknowledged the debt but attributed its inability to pay to government non-payment under a Ministry of Health contract, the termination of its GE contract, and other creditors, offering instalments of Ksh.20,000 per month. The claimant countered that the respondent concealed assets including motor vehicles, the Delta Riverside Office Park, and undisclosed quarterly receipts from General Electric Health Kenya Limited. The court held that there was a clear and unequivocal admission of the debt, that wages for labour rendered go to the root of the employee's livelihood and cannot await the employer's convenience, and that the instalment offer was empty. Judgment on admission was entered for the full sum of Ksh.1,192,544.95, with costs of the suit and application and interest at court rates until payment in full. Delivered at Nairobi on 29th March 2021 by M. Mbaru, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether judgment on admission was merited

Holding

The application seeking judgment on admission was found with merit and allowed for the full sum of Ksh.1,192,544.95

Reasoning

The respondent, through its CEO's Replying Affidavit, expressly acknowledged that the sum of Ksh.1,192,544.95 was due and owing and did not deny the claim, offering only instalment payments. The court held that where there is a clear and unequivocal admission, the court may enter judgment as it deems just under Order 13 Rule 2. The offer of Ksh.20,000 per month was not actualised and was 'empty'.

02

Whether the respondent's financial hardship justified instalment payments

Holding

Financial hardship did not displace the admitted debt; wages for labour rendered cannot await the respondent's hoped-for recovery

Reasoning

The respondent attributed its default to government non-payment under a Ministry of Health contract. The court emphasised that employment dues are the sustenance of the employee's livelihood and dignity and cannot be deferred, and noted the instalment offer had not been honoured.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where there is a clear and unequivocal admission of any part of the claim or its entirety, judgment may be entered on that admission under Order 13 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules
  • Judgment on admission is a discretionary power exercised sparingly in plain cases where the admission is clear and unequivocal

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Judgment entered on admission in favour of the claimant against the respondent for the sum of Ksh.1,192,544.95
  2. 2.The respondent shall pay costs of the suit and of the application
  3. 3.Interest at court rate from the date of judgment until payment in full
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 3 and 12(3) of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011 and Rule 17(1) and (8) of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016; Order 13 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Raphael Njuguna Kuria v Seven Seas Technologies Group Limited [2021] KEELRC 1488 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/1488/eng@2021-03-29

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