Kimalit v Laikipia University (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 44 of 2019) [2024] KEELRC 1706 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled a fixed-term contract simply ends when it expires, but the university still had to prove it actually paid the employee's allowances.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Respondent terminated the Claimant's service unfairly.
- 2.Whether the Claimant is entitled to the remedies sought.
Key legal issues
#Whether the Claimant's services were unfairly terminated
The contract ended by effluxion of time on non-renewal; no unfair termination, so compensation and severance pay fail
The Claimant served on successive fixed-term contracts renewable by mutual agreement. The Respondent notified him that the final contract would not be renewed and paid his gratuity at the end of each contract. A fixed-term contract ends on its own terms, so the termination under section 40 of the Employment Act did not arise; nor was he declared redundant.
Whether the Claimant was entitled to accrued acting allowance
Yes - awarded Kshs. 473,501/= as prayed since the Respondent did not prove full payment
Although the Claimant received responsibility and entertainment allowances in some months, the April 2013 payslip showed non-payment. The burden of proving payment rested on the Respondent, which failed to discharge it. The Court therefore awarded the pleaded accrued acting allowance of Kshs. 473,501/=.
Whether the Claimant was entitled to quarter per diem for the Netherlands training
Yes - awarded USD 1,481.25, converted to Kshs. 190,711 at 128.75 per dollar
The Respondent's own witness admitted that the approval document for the training provided for payment of ¼ per diem even where the employee was sponsored. Relying on the SRC Table 4 in the memorandum of claim, the Court found the Claimant entitled to the quarter per diem as pleaded and quantified it at USD 1,481.25.
Whether the Claimant was discriminated against
No separate finding or award on discrimination; claim succeeded only in part on monetary dues
The Claimant alleged discrimination in grade progression and non-conversion to permanent terms. The Respondent showed the farm manager grade ceiling was grade 10, the comparators held different qualifications and served different institutions, and the Claimant never applied for the advertised positions. No general damages for discrimination were awarded.
Legal principles established
#- A fixed-term contract ends on its own terms and cannot ground a claim of unfair termination when it lapses by effluxion of time
- Where an employer alleges payment of dues, the burden to prove such payment lies with the employer
Court orders
#- 1.Respondent to pay the Claimant accrued acting allowance of Kshs. 473,501/= as prayed
- 2.Respondent to pay quarter per diem of USD 1,481.25 converted at Kshs. 128.75 to the dollar, being Kshs. 190,711
- 3.Total payable Kshs. 663,212/= less statutory deductions
- 4.Costs of the suit to the Claimant
- 5.Interest at court rates with effect from the date of judgment
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, section 12
Relief refused
#12 months' compensation for unfair termination (Kshs. 750,288)
The claimant served on fixed-term contracts which ended by effluxion of time; contract ended by expiry, not unfair termination
Severance pay for 7 years (Kshs. 218,834)
No evidence that the claimant was declared redundant
General damages for discrimination
Claim succeeded only in part; no award of general damages made
Costs
Costs of the suit awarded to the Claimant, plus interest at court rates with effect from the date of judgment
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.
The Claimant having served on fixed term contract, renewable by mutual agreement, he could not insist on the contract being renewed when the Respondents didn’t agree.
In this case, the contract of the Claimant ended by effuxion of time and he cannot contend that he was unfairly terminated.
The Respondent did not discharge this burden and I therefore find the Claimant is entitled to be paid accrued acting allowance to the tune of Kshs. 473,501/= as prayed.
the claim succeeds in part and I order the Respondent pays the Claimant as indicated in the judgment plus costs of this suit and interest at court rates with efiect from the date of this judgment.
Issues in the judgment
#The case number of the cause is not stated anywhere in the judgment text provided
Judgment internally uses inconsistent spellings/typos (e.g. 'effuxion', 'efiect', 'stafi', dates such as '25/2/2029' for a list of documents)
The judgment records the per diem as covering training from 2nd July to 16th July in the claim but '2nd July to 10th July' in the analysis, a discrepancy within the judgment
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kimalit v Laikipia University (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 44 of 2019) [2024] KEELRC 1706 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment as provided (Employment and Labour Relations Court cause). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1706/eng@2024-07-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.