Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedELRC Cause No. 707 of 2017

James Kithinji v Jamii Co-operative Savings and Credit Society Ltd

Employment & Labour Relations Court of Kenya
21 September 2026
1,951 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled that once an employer remits deducted PAYE to KRA, it cannot be forced to refund it — disputes over tax computation belong at the Tax Tribunal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling by Hellen Wasilwa J of the Employment & Labour Relations Court at Nairobi on a Notice of Motion dated 27th November 2025 by James Kithinji, the claimant in ELRC Cause No. 707 of 2017. The claimant had obtained a judgment from Ocharo Kebira J awarding him Kshs. 624,752 (one month's notice pay of Kshs. 78,094 and seven months' compensation for unfair termination of Kshs. 546,658). The Respondent paid Kshs. 441,679 (or Kshs. 441,824.50 per the Respondent) after deducting PAYE, remitting the tax to KRA through its April 2024 payroll. The claimant sought the balance of Kshs. 120,597.80, contending that lump-sum compensation for loss of employment under an unspecified-term contract should be spread over three years and taxed without relief under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, yielding PAYE of only Kshs. 62,475.20. The Respondent, relying on Section 49(2) of the Employment Act and Peris Njeri Kinyanjui v Kobo Safaris Limited, maintained the deductions were mandatory, remitted, and that any dispute lay with KRA. The court held that the deducted PAYE, even if erroneous, was no longer in the Respondent's custody, that the claim could not lie in the absence of KRA, and that the Tax Tribunal was the correct forum to examine the computation. The application was dismissed with no order of costs.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the Respondent applied the correct method of taxation to the lump-sum payment awarded as compensation for loss of employment
  2. 2.Whether the decretal sum awarded under Section 49 of the Employment Act is subject to statutory deductions
  3. 3.Whether the Respondent lawfully deducted and remitted PAYE
  4. 4.Whether the Court can order the Respondent to release to the Claimant sums already deducted and remitted to the Kenya Revenue Authority

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether an employer can be ordered to refund PAYE already deducted and remitted to KRA

Holding

No. Once remitted, the funds are no longer in the employer's custody and any dispute over the computation lies with the Tax Tribunal, not the ELRC.

Reasoning

The court accepted that the Respondent deducted PAYE pursuant to Section 49(2) of the Employment Act and remitted it through its April 2024 payroll. Since the deducted amount was no longer in the Respondent's possession, ordering a refund would compel double payment. The court also noted KRA's absence as a party and held the Tax Tribunal competent to examine the computation and make appropriate orders.

p. 9
02

Whether sums awarded under Section 49 of the Employment Act are subject to statutory deductions

Holding

Yes - the Respondent's position that Section 49(2) mandates statutory deductions was not disturbed; the court did not decide the correctness of the PAYE computation.

Reasoning

The Respondent relied on Section 49(2) of the Employment Act and Peris Njeri Kinyanjui v Kobo Safaris Limited for the proposition that PAYE constitutes a mandatory statutory deduction. The court did not rule on whether the correct taxation method was applied, instead deflecting that question to the Tax Tribunal.

p. 7

Legal principles established

#
  • Where PAYE deducted from a decretal sum has been remitted to the Kenya Revenue Authority, the ELRC is not the proper forum for a claim for refund of the tax; the Tax Tribunal is the correct forum.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 27th November 2025 is dismissed
  2. 2.No order of costs

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Original employment and labour relations jurisdiction of the ELRC under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act; the matter arises from a decree in ELRC Cause No. 707 of 2017

Relief refused

#

Payment of Kshs. 120,597.80 being the decretal sum balance after alleged correct PAYE deduction

The deducted PAYE had been remitted to KRA and was no longer in the Respondent's custody; the correct forum is the Tax Tribunal

p. 9

Costs of the application

Court declined to award costs

p. 10

Costs

No order of costs - each party to bear their own costs

Quotable passages

#

Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.

Respectfully, the amount so deducted even if erroneous is no longer in custody of the respondent.
p. 9Employer not liable to refund remitted PAYE
The correct forum would in my view be the Tax Tribunal which is then capable of looking into the computation and determine if there was an overpayment thereof and then make orders appropriately.
p. 9Tax Tribunal as proper forum for PAYE computation disputes
I find that the application cannot therefore lie and the same is dismissed accordingly. There shall be no order of costs.
p. 10Final orders - dismissal and costs

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

Conflicting dates for the underlying judgment

minor

Conflicting dates for the underlying judgment

minor

Conflicting net payment figures

minor

Ruling dated 2026 postdates application of 27th November 2025 but captioned as 2025 application in a 2017 cause - chronology unusual

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "James Kithinji v Jamii Co-operative Savings and Credit Society Ltd", Case Analysis (2026). ELRC Cause No. 707 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2458/eng@2026-09-21

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