Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedNotice of Motion dated 10th February 2024 (number not stated)· [2025] KEELRC 1788 (KLR)

Judy v Grand Subterra Limited (Miscellaneous Application E003 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1788 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
17 June 2025
OKOcharo Kebira
720 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court confirmed it can enforce workplace injury compensation awards issued by DOSH, even though the law lacks a clear enforcement mechanism.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Applicant, an employee of the Respondent, sustained work-related injuries on 13th January 2024. The Directorate of Occupational Safety and Health Services, Malindi assessed 20% permanent incapacity and on 22nd July 2024 issued DOSH/WIBA 4 requiring the Respondent to compensate the Applicant KShs. 788,799. The Respondent neither objected nor appealed within the statutory period, nor paid the award. The Applicant moved the Court by Notice of Motion dated 10th February 2024 seeking adoption of the Director's award as a judgment of the Court, a decree for KShs. 788,799 with interest at 14% from the award date, and costs. The Respondent filed a preliminary objection dated 14th April 2025 contending that the Court lacked jurisdiction to enforce decisions of the Director of Safety and Health. The Court directed that the application and preliminary objection be determined simultaneously. Framing two issues - jurisdiction and whether the orders sought should issue - the Court held that although the Work Injury Benefits Act contains a gap in enforcement mechanisms, equity and the constitutional right of access to justice require the Court to innovate, and it has consistently asserted jurisdiction to issue facilitative enforcement orders, a position recently affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Charles v Cheto [2025] KECA 784 (KLR). The application was unopposed by affidavit or grounds of opposition. The Court allowed the application with costs and dismissed the preliminary objection. Judgment delivered virtually in Mombasa on 17th June 2025 by Ocharo Kebira, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction of the ELRC to enforce DOSH awards

Holding

The Court has jurisdiction to issue facilitative orders enforcing the Director's decisions notwithstanding the statutory gap

Reasoning

The Work Injury Benefits Act contains no express mechanism for enforcing the Director's decisions. Relying on equity and the constitutional right of access to justice, the Court has consistently held it may innovate to fill the gap, a position affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Charles v Cheto [2025] KECA 784 (KLR). The Respondent did not pursue any of the post-award statutory remedies nor oppose the application by affidavit or grounds of opposition.

p. 2
02

Whether the orders sought should issue

Holding

The application was allowed as unopposed and no statutory objection or appeal was lodged against the award

Reasoning

The Respondent never objected to or appealed the DOSH award within the statutory period, and did not file an affidavit or grounds of opposition to the application. The justice of the case demanded enforcement to give effect to the award of KShs. 788,799 for 20% permanent incapacity arising from work-related injuries sustained on 13th January 2024.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Despite the absence of enforcement mechanisms in the Work Injury Benefits Act, the ELRC has jurisdiction to issue facilitative orders for enforcement of the Director's decisions, grounded in the right of access to justice

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services' award/assessment of 22nd July 2024 (KShs. 788,799) adopted as judgment of the Court
  2. 2.A decree to issue for KShs. 788,799 with interest at court rates (14%) from 22nd July 2024 until full payment
  3. 3.The Respondent's preliminary objection dismissed
  4. 4.Costs of the application awarded to the Applicant
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent jurisdiction to issue facilitative orders enforcing the Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services' decisions under the Work Injury Benefits Act; access to justice under the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Judy v Grand Subterra Limited (Miscellaneous Application E003 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1788 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Notice of Motion dated 10th February 2024 (number not stated). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1788/eng@2025-06-17

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