Moi Teaching and Referal Hospital v Mauti (Appeal E032 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1812 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court confirmed that an employee's actual salary on pay slips, not a mistaken figure in court papers, decides which employment court hears the case.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the preliminary objection on pecuniary jurisdiction under Gazette Notice No. 6024 of 2018 should have succeeded given the pleaded salary of Kshs. 93,060
The preliminary objection was properly dismissed; the pay slips exhibited showed the Respondent's salary was within the magistrates' court's pecuniary jurisdiction, and the pleaded figure was attributable to an error that could be amended before close of pleadings
The trial court found the pleaded gross salary of Kshs. 93,000 was an error on the advocate's part, and exhibited pay slips indicated a salary within the Kshs. 80,000 limit. Rule 13(4) of the ELRC Rules, 2016 closes pleadings 14 days after service of a response, and Rule 14(6) permits amendment without leave before close of pleadings, so the salary was subject to regularization. The court held even if documents were filed late, the salary was within jurisdiction.
Whether the employer's course of conduct justified a preliminary objection
The objection was unnecessary and the appeal against it frivolous and vexatious; the employer should simply have produced employment records to clarify the salary
Since employment records are kept by the employer, an employer asserting that an employee overstated her salary in pleadings need only produce those records to clarify the position. Elevating such a dispute into a preliminary objection, and then a first appeal, wastes the court's limited resources and is frivolous and vexatious.
Whether the issue of transfer of the suit to a competent court arose
Submissions on transfer under section 18 of the Civil Procedure Act were irrelevant as the issue did not arise in the lower court or the appeal
The appeal concerned only whether the trial court had pecuniary jurisdiction. Arguments drawing on Equity Bank, Phoenix of E.A. Assurance and Kagenyi v Musiramo about the impossibility of transferring suits filed in courts without jurisdiction were beside the point because the preliminary objection had been dismissed and no question of transfer was live.
Legal principles established
#- Employment records are kept by the employer; where an employee inflates the salary in pleadings, the employer should produce employment records rather than raise a preliminary objection
- A preliminary objection on the employee's salary is not a pure point of law where documents on record show the salary is within the court's pecuniary jurisdiction
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed with costs
- 2.The suit is referred back to the trial court for hearing and disposal
- On appeal from
- Principal Magistrate's Court, Eldoret (CMELRC No. E117 of 2023)
- E117 of 2023
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over magistrates' courts under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act; Appellant invoked Article 162(2)(a) of the Constitution on the ELRC's High Court status
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Moi Teaching and Referal Hospital v Mauti (Appeal E032 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1812 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E117 of 2023 (Eldoret). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1812/eng@2025-06-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.