Thiongo v Egerton University (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E014 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1582 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment Court ordered Egerton University to pay a retired lecturer over Kshs 5 million in unpaid dues because its own witness statement admitted the debt.
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 claim is merited
Key legal issues
#Whether the claim is merited
The claim succeeded on the strength of the Respondent's own witness statement admitting the sums owed, and judgment was entered for the Claimant on the claimed amounts.
The court relied on a consent admitting the Respondent's witness statement and determining the claim without calling witnesses. The witness statement of Janet Bii admitted outstanding pension, deferred pay and unremitted loan deductions. Applying the law on admissions (Choitram v Nazari), the court treated these as admissions binding the Respondent and entered judgment on the amounts claimed, notwithstanding the Respondent's assertion of financial distress and its jurisdictional objection.
Jurisdiction over pension matters (raised by Respondent under Article 162(2) and Section 12(2) of the ELRC Act)
The court did not uphold the jurisdictional objection and proceeded to enter judgment including on unremitted pension deductions.
The Respondent submitted that the court lacked jurisdiction over pension issues, relying on Kenya Ports Authority v Industrial Court of Kenya. The court did not expressly rule on the objection but determined the claim on admissions and awarded the unremitted pension sums, implicitly treating employment-related pension deductions as within its remit.
Legal principles established
#- An admission in pleadings or documents may ground judgment, including admissions in a party's witness statement that concede the debt owed.
- Costs follow the event unless the court for good reason otherwise orders, but the award of costs is discretionary.
Court orders
#- 1.Payment of unremitted pension deduction meant for remittance to the Respondent's retirement pension scheme from October 2017 to June 2023 amounting to Kshs. 2,537,193.74/=
- 2.Payment of deferred gross pay in the sum of Kshs. 1,871,637.30/=
- 3.Payment of deferred CBA arrears in the sum of Kshs. 98,370/=
- 4.Payment of unremitted loan deductions to Standard Chartered Bank amounting to Kshs. 526,688/=
- 5.Interest on the above sums at 14% per annum from the date of Judgment till full payment
- 6.If there are any other pension dues owing to the claimant he should follow the right channel to pursue the same from the pension scheme
- 7.Each party to bear their own costs of the suit
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2) of the Constitution read with Section 12(2) of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (jurisdiction raised by Respondent but the court proceeded to determine the claim)
Relief refused
#Costs of the suit
The court declined to award costs to the successful Claimant, instead ordering each party to bear their own costs despite the Claimant's reliance on Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and the principle that costs follow the event.
Any other pension dues beyond the sum awarded
The court directed that any further pension dues must be pursued through the proper pension channel rather than this suit.
Costs
Each party will bear their costs of this suit
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 Respondent therefore has acknowledged that it owes the Claimant his dues including his unremitted pension dues, gross pay and money deduced as his loan repayment and not yet paid to the Bank.
Flowing from the foregoing, this Honourable Court enters judgment in favour of the Claimant against the Respondent as follows:
The claimant is entitled to interest on the above a-d at 14% per annum from the date of this Judgment till full payment.
Each party will bear their costs of this suit. Order accordingly.
Issues in the judgment
#The court awards the full claimed sum of Kshs. 2,537,193.74 for unremitted pension despite the Respondent's admitted witness statement pegging the admitted outstanding pension at a lower figure, without explaining the discrepancy.
The court awards the full claimed deferred gross pay of Kshs. 1,871,637.30 despite the Respondent's witness statement admitting only Kshs. 1,167,174.22, without explaining the discrepancy.
The court awards Kshs. 526,688/= for unremitted loan deductions as claimed, although the Respondent's witness statement admitted only Kshs. 460,852 for December 2020 to June 2021.
The claim was stated as for the period October 2017 to September 2023 in the pleadings, but the orders refer to October 2017 to June 2023.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Thiongo v Egerton University (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E014 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1582 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment (memorandum of claim dated 8th March 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1582/eng@2025-05-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.