Lomari & 4 others v County Government of Turkana & 4 others (Cause E010, E011, E012, E013 & E014 of 2023 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELRC 312 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment Court confirmed compensation for five sacked Turkana Chief Officers but refused to pay them for contract time they never worked.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the claims are res judicata by virtue of the Public Service Commission's decision on the Claimants' appeals
The claims are res judicata on the issues that were subject of the PSC decision (prayers 1, 2 and 3) but properly before the court on the issues that were not, namely prayers 4 and 5.
The Claimants appealed to the Public Service Commission, which exercised its statutory mandate and determined the causes of action with finality. No application for review under section 77 of the County Governments Act or appeal against that decision was tendered. The Commission's decision therefore remains valid and binding, precluding a second bite at the same issues, while issues outside the Commission's decision remain justiciable before the ELRC.
What reliefs should issue on the heads of claim not res judicata
The PSC awards on notice pay, compensation for unfair termination and gratuity are confirmed and adopted as orders of the court; leave pay is awarded to be computed; salary for the unexpired contract, medical cover, training and airtime are declined.
The court declined payment for the unexpired contract period because the contracts ended on the termination dates and no service was rendered thereafter. Heads already compensated by the PSC without challenge were confirmed and adopted as court orders. Leave pay earned but untaken was awarded, and costs were limited to 50% of taxed costs reflecting partial success.
Legal principles established
#- Where a claimant has appealed to the Public Service Commission and the Commission has determined the issues with finality, and no review or appeal is preferred against that decision, a subsequent suit on the same issues is res judicata, but the claims remain properly before the ELRC on issues not subject to that decision.
- An employee whose contract is terminated is entitled to pay in lieu of leave earned but not taken as at the date of termination.
Court orders
#- 1.Prayers 1, 2 and 3 of the Claims declared res judicata as they were subject of the decision of the Public Service Commission
- 2.The awards by the Public Service Commission on notice pay, compensation for unfair termination and gratuity confirmed and adopted as orders of the court, with judgment entered for the Claimants against the Respondents in terms thereof (one month's salary in lieu of notice; six months' salary for unfair termination for Augustine Lokwang Ekitela, Stella E Lochodo and Dr. Jacob Lolelea Natade; three months' for Jeremia Apalia Lomari; nine months' for Esther Ikaru; and service gratuity for the period served)
- 3.Each Claimant awarded pay in lieu of any leave earned but not taken, to be computed by the Respondent based on the employment records
- 4.Prayers for salary for remainder of contract, medical cover entitlement, annual training benefits and airtime entitlement declined
- 5.Each Claimant awarded 50% of taxed costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under Article 162(2) of the Constitution (implied); claims for breach of Articles 41, 47 and 236
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Lomari & 4 others v County Government of Turkana & 4 others (Cause E010, E011, E012, E013 & E014 of 2023 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELRC 312 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Kitale ELRC No. E010, E011, E012, E013 & E014 of 2023 (consolidated). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/312/eng@2025-02-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.