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· [2023] KEELRC 648 (KLR)

Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union v Hygrotech East Africa Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E004 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 648 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
9 March 2023
2,923 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled that an employee properly served with redundancy notice cannot claim notice pay, and only proven, denied leave earns compensation.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant Union, a registered trade union representing unionisable agricultural-sector employees, sued on behalf of its member, Samuel Osiemo, a security guard employed by the Respondent from June 2008 until his redundancy with effect from 28 February 2019. The Union sought Kshs 127,499 as the shortfall in his terminal dues, a certificate of service and costs. The grievant testified that he was underpaid his terminal dues and denied leave for the last three years of service. The Respondent maintained that the dues were correctly calculated, that the grievant took all leave applied for, that the certificate of service was available for collection, and challenged the Union's locus standi and limitation. Following failed conciliation through the Ministry of Labour, the matter proceeded to trial. The court held that adequate one-month redundancy notice had been given, so notice pay was not payable; the travelling allowance of Kshs 1,500 was not demonstrated; and although three years' leave was claimed, there was no indication leave was sought and denied, so only leave for the last year of service, at Kshs 14,000, was awarded. The court did not expressly rule on the locus standi or limitation objections. The suit succeeded only in part: the Respondent was ordered to pay leave due for one year at Kshs 14,000, with costs of the suit to the Claimant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Entitlement to notice pay on redundancy

Holding

No notice pay is payable where one month's redundancy notice was given effective after 28 February 2019

Reasoning

The court noted the redundancy notice dated 22 January 2019 took effect after 28 February 2019. That constituted adequate notice under the redundancy regime, extinguishing any claim for salary in lieu of notice despite the demand letter including a month's salary for notice.

p. 6
02

Accrued leave pay

Holding

The grievant is entitled only to leave for the last year of service, awarded at Kshs 14,000

Reasoning

The grievant claimed leave for three years, but there was no evidence he applied for leave and was denied. The court found he was only entitled to leave for the final year of service and granted the equivalent of one month's salary at Kshs 14,000.

p. 6
03

Travelling allowance

Holding

Not payable as no basis was demonstrated

Reasoning

The demand letter's breakdown included a travelling allowance of Kshs 1,500, but the grievant did not demonstrate any entitlement to this head, and the court declined the claim.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • Where adequate redundancy notice has been given, an employee is not entitled to notice pay
  • An employee must demonstrate that leave was sought and denied to claim accrued leave beyond the last year of service

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Respondent to pay the grievant leave due for 1 year of service in the sum of Kshs 14,000
  2. 2.The Claimant is awarded costs of the suit

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Labour Relations Actsection 2
  • Labour Relations Actsection 52
  • Employment Actsection 90
  • Employment Actsection 40
  • Employment Actsections 40(1)(f), 43 and 45 (as set out in cited authority)
  • Employment Actsection 28(4) (as set out in cited authority)

Cases cited (10)

  • Kenya Airline Pilots Association V Kenya Airways PLC
    [2021] eKLR
  • Tibbs Vincent Robert V SGS Kenya Limited
    [2022] eKLR
  • Daniel Mburu Muriu V Hygrotech East Africa Limited
    [2021] eKLR
  • Rumba Mnyika Nguta V Southern Hills Development Agency Limited t/a Radio Kaya
    [2020] eKLR
  • Republic V Commissioner of Domestic Taxes Ex parte Sony Holdings Limited
    [2019] eKLR
  • Independent electoral and boundaries commission and another v Stephen Mutinda Mule and 3 others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Malawi Railways Ltd Vs Nyasulu
    [1998] MWSC 3
  • ADetoun Oladeji (NIG) LTD Vs Nigeria Breweries PLC
    SC 91/2002
  • Elizabeth O Odhiambo v South Nyanza sugar Co ltd
    [2019] eKLR
  • Rael Namasa Likhayo V Lake Fill Station
    [2022] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment dispute arising from terminal dues following redundancy

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union v Hygrotech East Africa Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E004 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 648 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/648/eng@2023-03-09

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