Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedCause No 75 of 2021· [2022] KEELRC 476 (KLR)

Arafa Amin Mohamed (Suing as the legal Representative to the Estate of Omar Khatib Abdulkadir –Deceased) v Dola Feeds (K) Limited [2022] KEELRC 476 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya
18 March 2022
1,168 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

#

Kenya's Employment Court confirmed a widow can enforce an unpaid workplace injury award directly, ordering the employer to pay Kshs. 2.45 million.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant, the widow and legal representative of Omar Khatib Abdulkadir, who died in a road accident on 08.02.2019 while in the respondent's employment, sued for enforcement of a WIBA assessment. The County Occupational Safety and Health Officer assessed the amount payable at Kshs. 2,457,600.00 on 15.10.2019, but the respondent failed to pay. The claimant invoked sections 26(1), 26(4) and 51 of WIBA, noting that no objection had been lodged, and prayed for payment, interest, costs and a declaration that the respondent had committed the offence under section 26(4). The respondent denied notification of the assessment and contended the suit was premature. The Court found the employment relationship and the assessment duly proved, accepted the claimant's unrebutted testimony of service of the assessment letters, and noted the respondent neither paid nor objected. On jurisdiction, the Court held that despite the absence of a statutory enforcement procedure for the Director's decision under WIBA, it enjoys general original jurisdiction under section 12 of the ELRCA and relied on its decision in Edwin Songoroh. However, it declined the prayer for a declaration of criminal liability, holding that such a finding requires criminal proceedings before a competent lower court and proof beyond reasonable doubt. Judgment was entered for the claimant: the award was ordered enforced as a judgment of the Court, payable by 01.05.2022 failing interest at court rates, with costs to the claimant and a decree to issue.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction to enforce the Director's WIBA assessment

Holding

The Court has jurisdiction despite the absence of express statutory enforcement procedure.

Reasoning

The Court considered its earlier decisions, noting that neither WIBA nor subsidiary rules provide a procedure for enforcing the Director's decision. Relying on section 159 of the Constitution and section 12 of the ELRCA, the Court held that it enjoys general original jurisdiction over the suit, so overlapping jurisdiction with the lower courts does not oust its competence to entertain the enforcement suit as filed.

p. 2
02

Service and non-payment of the assessment

Holding

The claimant proved service of the assessment of Kshs. 2,457,600.00 and the respondent neither paid nor objected.

Reasoning

The DOSH/WIBA4 assessment was duly exhibited and signed; the claimant's unrebutted testimony established service of the County Occupational Safety and Health Officer's letters on the respondent's manager. The respondent suggested no objection to the assessment and gave no reason for failure to pay, having also been served in the suit itself.

p. 1
03

Prayer for declaration of criminal offence under section 26(4) WIBA

Holding

Declined; such a finding belongs to criminal proceedings before a competent lower court.

Reasoning

The Court held that a finding of criminal liability requires appropriate criminal justice proceedings before a court with competent criminal jurisdiction and proof beyond reasonable doubt. The instant civil enforcement suit does not meet that standard, so the prayer for a declaration that the respondent committed the offence was refused.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Despite the statutory lacuna on the procedure for enforcing the Director's decision under WIBA, the ELRC enjoys general original jurisdiction under section 12 of the ELRCA to entertain an enforcement suit.
  • A declaration of criminal liability under section 26(4) of WIBA cannot be made in civil proceedings; the offence must be prosecuted in criminal proceedings with proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The award of Kshs. 2,457,600.00 be enforced as a judgment of the Court, payable by 01.05.2022 failing interest at court rates from the date of filing suit until full payment
  2. 2.The respondent to pay the claimant's costs of the suit
  3. 3.A decree to issue accordingly

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007 (WIBA)section 26(1)
  • Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007 (WIBA)section 26(4)
  • Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007 (WIBA)section 51
  • Work Injury Benefits Act, 2007 (WIBA)section 56
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010section 159 (as cited in the judgment)
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011section 12
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011Part V; section 26

Cases cited (4)

  • Ruth Wambui Mwangi and Another –Versus- Alfarah Wholesalers Limited
    [2017]eKLR
  • Virginia Wangari Muita –Versus- Nyoro Construction Company Limited
    [2020]eKLR
  • Richard Akama Nyambane –Versus- ICG Maltauro Spa
    [2020]eKLR
  • Edwin Songoroh and Another –Versus- Amony Koech Yatich and Another
    [2021]eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011 (general original jurisdiction); WIBA, 2007

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (3)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Arafa Amin Mohamed (Suing as the legal Representative to the Estate of Omar Khatib Abdulkadir –Deceased) v Dola Feeds (K) Limited [2022] KEELRC 476 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Cause No 75 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/476/eng@2022-03-18

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