Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially Allowednot_stated_in_judgment· [2021] KEELRC 1894 (KLR)

Kenya Building Construction Timber and Furniture Industries Employee Union v Weston Contractors (K) Ltd [2021] KEELRC 1894 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
4 February 2021
1,323 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant Union, acting for Grievants Benard Ondieki Osoro (Welder Grade III employed 4th May 2008) and Jackson Kahindi Kiyuge (general labourer/Carperter employed 12th June 1997), claimed that both were dismissed on 7th March 2012 after being paid weekly wages, and sought notice pay, leave, severance pay, housing allowance, underpayment arrears, 12 months' compensation and certificates of service, relying on a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Kenya Association of Building and Civil Engineering Contractors. The Respondent denied the dismissal, asserting the Grievants absconded and that the CBA had lapsed. The suit, initially resolved by an ex parte judgment on 2nd October 2015 (set aside on 11th November 2016), went to full trial. The court found the Grievants and others had staged a sit-in over accrued wages, and that the Respondent had invited them back to work by letters of 18 April 2012, 5 June 2012 and 7 June 2012, offers they declined unless paid for days not worked. Holding that an employee who without good cause refuses an employer's recall cannot claim unfair termination, the court dismissed the unlawful dismissal, notice pay, compensation, severance, housing allowance and underpayment claims, but awarded leave pay limited to three years under Section 90 of the Employment Act: Kshs. 31,500 to the 1st Grievant and Kshs. 25,200 to the 2nd Grievant, with interest at court rates from the date of judgment, plus Certificates of Service. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs. Judgment was delivered virtually at Mombasa on 4th February 2021.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Grievants were unlawfully dismissed

Holding

The claim of unlawful dismissal failed; the Grievants declined a valid offer to return to work, so their employment cannot be said to have been unfairly terminated by the Respondent.

Reasoning

The evidence showed the Grievants and other workers staged a sit-in over accrued wages. The Respondent wrote letters dated 18 April 2012, 7 June 2012 and 5 June 2012 inviting them back. The Grievants declined unless paid for days not worked, a condition with no basis in law. A refusal of a genuine recall to duty defeats a claim of unfair termination.

p. 3
02

Entitlement to severance pay

Holding

Dismissed; no redundancy was proved.

Reasoning

Severance pay attaches to redundancy. There was no evidence the Grievants' employment was terminated on account of redundancy, so the severance claim was unsupported and failed.

p. 3
03

Leave pay and limitation

Holding

Leave pay allowed but limited to three years under Section 90 of the Employment Act.

Reasoning

In the absence of leave records to the contrary, the court assumed untaken leave but restricted the claim to the statutory three-year limitation period, awarding Kshs. 31,500 to the 1st Grievant and Kshs. 25,200 to the 2nd Grievant.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • An employee who, without good cause, declines an employer's offer to resume duty cannot later claim unfair termination
  • Leave claims are limited to three years by the limitation period in Section 90 of the Employment Act
  • The court is not bound by a Conciliator's recommendations unsupported by legal provisions

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Judgment entered in favour of the 1st Grievant, Benard Ondieki Osoro, of Kshs. 31,500 being leave pay for 3 years
  2. 2.Judgment entered in favour of the 2nd Grievant, Jackson Kahindi Kiyuge, of Kshs. 25,200 being leave pay for 3 years
  3. 3.The amounts to attract interest at court rates from the date of judgment until payment in full
  4. 4.The Grievants to be issued with Certificates of Service
  5. 5.Each party to bear their own costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 90
  • Labour Relations Actdispute reporting to the Minister

Cases cited (2)

  • Dexter Muye Mwangombe v Mombasa Go-Kart-Garimeli Limited
    [2019] eKLR
  • Randa Ali Charo v Riley Services Limited
    Cause No 230 of 2016
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes (Labour Relations Act dispute reported to the Minister; claim filed as Memorandum of Claim)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Building Construction Timber and Furniture Industries Employee Union v Weston Contractors (K) Ltd [2021] KEELRC 1894 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). not_stated_in_judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/1894/eng@2021-02-04

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