Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedMisc Application No E097 of 2024· [2024] KEELRC 2540 (KLR)

Omollo v Securex Agencies [K] Limited (Miscellaneous Application E097 of 2024) [2024] KEELRC 2540 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
22 October 2024
OKOcharo Kebira
1,644 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 Mombasa court confirmed that workers can enforce unpaid workplace injury awards through the Employment and Labour Relations Court, with interest.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Applicant, an employee of the Respondent, suffered workplace injuries on 20th September 2021. The Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services (DOSH), Mombasa, assessed the injuries as temporary total incapacity and on 23rd March 2023 required the Respondent to pay the Applicant compensation of Kshs. 437,620.80 within 90 days. The Respondent neither paid, nor filed an objection under Section 51 of the Work Injury Benefits Act (WIBA), nor appealed under Section 52. By a Notice of Motion dated 19th September 2024, the Applicant sought adoption of the Director's award as the judgment of the Court, a decree for the awarded sum with compounded annual interest, and costs. The Respondent opposed, arguing a duplicative earlier application and lack of jurisdiction in the Court to enforce the Director's award. Justice Ocharo Kebira identified a single issue: whether the orders sought should be granted. Holding that WIBA is silent on enforcement of the Director's award, the Court relied on prior ELRC authority and Rule 59 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Procedure Rules, 2024, to found jurisdiction under Article 162(2) of the Constitution and Section 12 of the ELRC Act. The Court declined to revisit the merits, as that is the preserve of the Director, and held the Respondent's failure to object or appeal left the award unassailed and matured for enforcement. The application was allowed with costs, with a decree for Kshs. 437,620.80; however, interest was awarded as simple interest rather than compounded as sought.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the ELRC has jurisdiction to enforce/adopt the Director's DOSH award in the absence of an enforcement mechanism in WIBA

Holding

Yes; the ELRC has jurisdiction under Article 162(2) and Section 12 of the ELRC Act, reinforced by Rule 59 of the ELRC Procedure Rules 2024, to adopt and enforce the Director's award where no objection or appeal is pending.

Reasoning

WIBA is silent on enforcement of the Director's award. The Court refused to leave an injured employee without remedy, reading WIBA together with the Constitution and other statutes. The Respondent neither objected within 60 days under Section 51 nor appealed under Section 52, so the award stood unchallenged and non-settled. Social justice, rule of law, and access to justice under Articles 10 and 48 obligated the Court to issue facilitative enforcement orders.

p. 3
02

Whether the Court may go into the merits of the Director's award

Holding

No; absent an appeal under Section 52 of WIBA, the Court cannot consider the merits or embark on a fact-finding exercise.

Reasoning

The Court adopted the general position from Joash Shisia Cheto v Thepot Patrick Charles that enforcement proceedings are confined to enforcement; the merits of the Director's assessment are the preserve of the Director, with objections under Section 51 and appeals under Section 52 as the only challenge avenues. The Respondent failed to use either.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The ELRC has inherent jurisdiction to adopt the Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services' award as its judgment for execution where no objection or appeal has been mounted against it under Sections 51 and 52 of WIBA

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services' award of 23rd March 2023 for Kshs. 437,620.80 is adopted as the judgment of the Court
  2. 2.A decree to issue for Kshs. 437,620.80
  3. 3.Interest thereon at Court rates from the award date until payment in full, simple interest not compounded
  4. 4.Costs of the application awarded to the Applicant

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 10, 27(1) & (2), 41(1), 48, 162
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court ActSection 12
  • Work Injury Benefits ActSections 10(1), 19(2), 51, 51(1), 52, 52(2)
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Procedure Rules, 2024Rule 59

Cases cited (3)

  • Elijah Kisyanga Ndende –Vs- The Manager Zahkem International Construction Ltd
    [2022] eKLR
  • Samson Chweya Mwandabole –Vs- Protective Custody Limited
    [2021] eKLR
  • Joash Shisia Cheto v Thepot Patrick Charles
    [2022] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2) of the Constitution as read with Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act and Rule 59 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Procedure Rules, 2024

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (1)

#

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, "Omollo v Securex Agencies [K] Limited (Miscellaneous Application E097 of 2024) [2024] KEELRC 2540 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Misc Application No E097 of 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/2540/eng@2024-10-22

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