Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedMemorandum of Claim dated November 8, 2016· [2022] KEELRC 108 (KLR)

Lubengwa v Officer in Charge Ministry of Works, Welfare & Sports Association (Cause 2265 of 2016) [2022] KEELRC 108 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
14 June 2022
1,804 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

#

A Kenyan court dismissed an employee's entire claim because he accepted a settlement payment and signed away his right to sue.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, a Security Guard employed orally on May 2, 2011 and terminated on June 30, 2016, sued for wrongful dismissal and outstanding terminal dues: overtime for four extra daily hours, underpayment of basic pay (monthly salary of Kshs. 10,500/-), unpaid public holidays, house allowance, off-duty days, annual leave, refund of NSSF and NHIF deductions, salary for July 2016, one month's notice, service pay, compensation for unfair dismissal, a certificate of service, costs and interest. The Respondent denied the claim, asserting the Claimant was summarily dismissed after a disciplinary hearing for habitual drunkenness and absenteeism, was housed at Wilson Camp (hence no house allowance), and accepted Kshs. 50,000/- in full settlement. Both parties filed submissions; the Claimant relied on authorities on substantive justification and procedural fairness under Sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act, while the Respondent relied on authorities on burden of proof and house allowance. The court found that the Claimant was housed at the Respondent's camp, defeating the house allowance claim under Section 31, and that after a conciliation meeting on September 5, 2016 he accepted Kshs. 50,000/- and signed an undertaking not to make further claims, amounting to a waiver. The suit was dismissed with costs to the Respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Claimant's acceptance of Kshs. 50,000/- barred the suit

Holding

Yes. The Claimant signed a letter on 14th September 2016 after a conciliation meeting accepting the payment and stating he would make no further claim; the suit was therefore dismissed.

Reasoning

The court found it common ground that the Claimant was terminated on June 30, 2016 and thereafter attended a conciliation meeting on September 5, 2016. He accepted Kshs. 50,000/- and signed an acknowledgment undertaking not to make any further claim. Mounting a suit thereafter was held erroneous and without basis, amounting to a claim that clogged the justice system.

p. 3
02

House allowance

Holding

Not payable because the Respondent housed the Claimant at Wilson Camp, which constitutes reasonable accommodation under Section 31 of the Employment Act.

Reasoning

The court found as a fact that although the Claimant was not paid house allowance, he was housed at the Respondent's Wilson Camp. Section 31 of the Employment Act provides that where the employer provides reasonable accommodation, the employee cannot claim house allowance. This resolved the house allowance claim against the Claimant.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where an employer provides reasonable accommodation to an employee, the employee cannot claim house allowance
  • A settlement sum accepted and acknowledged in writing after conciliation operates as a waiver of further claims

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Suit dismissed with costs to the Respondent
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment claims under the Employment Act, 2007

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Lubengwa v Officer in Charge Ministry of Works, Welfare & Sports Association (Cause 2265 of 2016) [2022] KEELRC 108 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Memorandum of Claim dated November 8, 2016. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/108/eng@2022-06-14

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