Kenya Building Consruction, Timber and Furniture Industries Employees Union v Timsales Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E029, E030 & E031 of 2021 (Consolidated)) [2023] KEELRC 2692 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employer that ignored a court order to calculate unpaid salaries lost the fight when the judge simply adopted the workers' Kshs. 8.96 million figure.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether to adopt the Claimant's computation of unpaid June and July 2018 salaries
Adopted; the Respondents filed no computation as ordered, so the Claimant's figure of Kshs. 8,963,896/= plus costs and interest forms part of the judgment
The court's order of 5th October 2023 directed the parties to agree on or submit calculations of salaries due from June 2018 to 27th July 2018. The claimant filed its computation on 18th October 2023. The respondents filed only submissions contesting the court's jurisdiction to specify the period, without any computation. In the absence of any computation to the contrary, the court adopted the claimant's figures and incorporated them into the judgment with costs and interest.
Whether the respondents' post-judgment correspondence shows the grievants were paid their July 2018 salaries
Rejected; the material amounted to fresh pleadings never tested as evidence and cannot prove payment
The respondents, on a without-prejudice basis, attached correspondence said to show the grievants were paid their July 2018 salaries. The court held this was an attempt to introduce fresh pleadings which had not been tested as evidence before the court and therefore could not be evidence of payment. The respondents' objection to the court's post-judgment specification of the unpaid period was a matter for appeal, and no appeal had been preferred.
Whether the court, having delivered judgment, was functus officio and could not specify the unpaid period
Objection not upheld; the issue was one for appeal and no appeal was filed
The respondents argued that filling gaps post-judgment was prejudicial and unknown to law, relying on authorities on the binding nature of pleadings. The court held the order merely compelled the parties to calculate figures payable as explained in the judgment, and that the respondents' grievance about the specification of the period could be a subject of an appeal, for which none had been preferred. The objection therefore did not prevent adoption of the claimant's computation.
Legal principles established
#- Where a court orders parties to compute figures payable and one party fails to file any computation, the court may adopt the other party's computation as part of its judgment
- Pleadings or submissions filed post-judgment that were never produced as evidence cannot prove payment
Court orders
#- 1.Adoption of the computation submitted by the claimants dated 17th October 2023 as salary for the claimants not paid in June and July 2018, totalling Kshs. 8,963,896/=, plus costs and interest
- 2.The amounts to form part of the judgment of the court
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original employment and labour relations jurisdiction; implementation of the Court's earlier judgment of 17/01/2023 and ruling of 5th October 2023
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Building Consruction, Timber and Furniture Industries Employees Union v Timsales Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E029, E030 & E031 of 2021 (Consolidated)) [2023] KEELRC 2692 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/2692/eng@2023-10-31
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.