Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedELRC Cause (Nairobi), Claim dated 19th October 2021 (number not stated in judgment)· [2024] KEELRC 1845 (KLR)

Union of National Research Institutes Staff of Kenya (UNRISK) v Kenya Medical Research Insitute (Cause E866 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 1845 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
12 July 2024
AJAbuodha Nelson Jorum
4,561 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~18 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court ruled that fixed-term contracts simply expire when they end, so KEMRI owed no severance or compensation to workers whose contracts were not renewed.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant union sued the Respondent on behalf of fourteen Grievants employed on renewable fixed term contracts and deployed to the Walter Reed Project at Kericho, alleging their non-renewal in 2018 was a redundancy effected without the mandatory procedure in section 40(1) of the Employment Act and in breach of the recognition agreement and Article 11 of the CBA registered as RCA No. 225 of 2014. The Claimant sought declarations of unlawful and unfair redundancy, reinstatement, twelve months' compensation, fifteen days' severance pay per year of service, production of funding and employment records, and costs. The Respondent denied that the terminations amounted to redundancy, contending the Grievants were on fixed term contracts which expired by effluxion of time, that the CBA had expired, and that it never employed the 11th and 12th Grievants, who were engaged by the Henry M. Jackson Foundation. The matter proceeded by documentary evidence and written submissions. The court framed four issues: applicability of the CBA; employment status of the 11th and 12th Grievants; whether there was unfair termination or automatic expiry; and entitlement to reliefs. It held the expired CBA remained in force by industry practice; that the 11th and 12th Grievants bore no employment relationship with the Respondent and had no claim against it; and that the remaining Grievants' fixed term contracts, renewable only at the employer's option subject to funding, ended by effluxion of time, which is not redundancy. The entire claim was dismissed with costs to the Respondent on 12th July 2024.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the CBA registered as RCA No. 225 of 2014 remained applicable despite expiry

Holding

The CBA remained applicable notwithstanding expiry, as an expired CBA continues in force until a new one is negotiated, signed and registered

Reasoning

The CBA provided it would remain in force for four years from 1st July 2013 to 30th June 2017. Although the Grievants' Walter Reed contracts ran from March to September 2018, after expiry of the CBA, the court held that industry practice keeps an expired CBA in force until a successor agreement is negotiated, signed and registered. The CBA registered as RCA No. 225 of 2014 therefore remained applicable.

p. 9
02

Whether the 11th and 12th Grievants were employees of the Respondent

Holding

They were not the Respondent's employees; no contracts were issued to them and their claim against the Respondent fails

Reasoning

The Respondent denied employing the 11th and 12th Grievants, alleging they were engaged by Henry M. Jackson Foundation (HJF MRI). The court noted the Respondent did not issue contracts to them and internal minutes referred only to the other Grievants. Relying on the burden of proof of the employment relationship lying with the claimant, the court held the claimant should have sued HJF MRI rather than demand third-party proceedings.

p. 9
03

Whether the Grievants were unfairly and wrongfully terminated on account of redundancy or their fixed term contracts expired automatically

Holding

The Grievants were on fixed term contracts which ended by effluxion of time; there was no unfair termination or redundancy

Reasoning

The contracts ran from 1st March 2018 to 30th September 2018, renewable at the employer's option subject to availability of funds, consistent with section 10(3)(c) of the Employment Act. The Grievants were notified in July and September 2018 of non-renewal due to reduced donor funding. Following the Presbyterian Church of East Africa case, fixed term contracts are self-terminating and carry no expectations beyond expiry; non-renewal for lack of funding is not redundancy.

p. 10
04

Whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought

Holding

The Claimant is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought and the entire claim is dismissed with costs

Reasoning

Having found that the Grievants' fixed term contracts expired by effluxion of time and that there was no unfair termination, redundancy, wrongful dismissal or breach of section 40 of the Employment Act or the CBA, the court held the Claimant was not entitled to reinstatement, compensation, severance pay or any other relief, and dismissed the claim in its entirety with costs.

p. 10

Legal principles established

#
  • Fixed term contracts carry no rights, obligations or expectations beyond the date of expiry and are self-terminating
  • Existence of an employer-employee relationship is primal to any employment claim and the burden of proving it lies with the claimant
  • By industry practice an expired CBA remains in force until a new one is negotiated, signed and registered

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The claim in its entirety is found without merit and is hereby dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the suit awarded to the Respondent
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (as cited in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Union of National Research Institutes Staff of Kenya (UNRISK) v Kenya Medical Research Insitute (Cause E866 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 1845 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). ELRC Cause (Nairobi), Claim dated 19th October 2021 (number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1845/eng@2024-07-12

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