Mutuma v Winners Chapel International (Cause E028 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2426 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ordered a church to pay its former accountant unpaid leave allowance and a certificate of service, but refused salary arrears because he had signed away the cut.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Which of the two staff handbooks produced was the authentic one?
- 2.Whether the claimant is entitled to the orders sought
Key legal issues
#Authenticity of the competing staff handbooks
The respondent's bound original 21st November 2012 Edition marked 'Final Press Copy' with a declaration of effective date was the authentic handbook, not the claimant's photocopy containing editorial comment balloons.
The court perused both documents. The claimant's copy was a photocopy bearing comment balloons with proposed edits across many pages, had no endorsement as final press copy and no declaration of effective date. The respondent's copy was bound, unannotated, marked 'Final Press Copy' and contained a declaration that it was the authorised edition effective 21st November 2012.
Entitlement to terminal dues and declaration of unfair labour practice
The claimant was not entitled to the declaration because his incomplete clearance caused the delay in payment of terminal dues.
Section 11.2 of the handbook required a resigning employee to hand over all church property. The respondent's letter of 6th January 2024 conditioned payment of terminal dues on clearance and handover. The claimant admitted his handing over covered only accounts and that he did not complete clearance, so any delay in remitting terminal dues was self-inflicted.
Gratuity
The claimant was entitled to gratuity at 15 days' salary for each completed year of service for the 7 years before he became pensionable; the respondent had already paid more than the computed entitlement.
Although the claimant claimed gratuity of one month's gross salary per year over 10 years (Kshs. 954,506.40), the operative handbook had no gratuity provision. The respondent pleaded and computed gratuity at 15 days' pay per full year for the 7 non-pensionable years, paying Kshs. 244,827.88, which exceeded the court's computation of Kshs. 231,073.50.
Leave allowance
The claimant was entitled to unpaid leave allowance for 2013 to 2020 of Kshs. 134,457 plus 2023 leave allowance of Kshs. 95,450, since no evidence proved the alleged 13th salary was leave allowance.
The handbook entitled the employee to one month's gross salary annually as leave allowance. The respondent alleged this was paid as a 13th salary each year but tendered no proof. The court took judicial notice that a 13th salary is a bonus, not leave allowance. The unrebutted demand letter showed Kshs. 134,457 due for the 7 years, and 2023 leave allowance was raised by the respondent's own pleadings and evidence.
Legal principles established
#- A certificate of service is a statutory right of an employee under section 51 of the Employment Act.
- An employee who consents in writing to a salary reduction cannot later claim the shortfall as salary arrears.
- A 13th salary is a bonus and cannot be treated as payment of leave allowance absent evidence of payment of the allowance.
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the claimant: gratuity for 7 years of Kshs. 244,827.88 and leave allowance for 2013 to 2020 of Kshs. 229,907.64, totalling Kshs. 474,734.64, less the gross amount already paid of Kshs. 297,601.57, leaving a net award of Kshs. 177,133.95
- 2.Interest on the award at court rates from the date of filing the suit
- 3.The Respondent directed to issue the claimant a certificate of service as a right under section 51 of the Employment Act
- 4.Claimant awarded costs of the suit
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act and ELRC Procedure Rules (not expressly pleaded in the judgment)
Relief refused
#Declaration that the Respondent's failure to remit terminal dues contravened the Administrative Handbook, the Employment Act and amounted to unfair labour practices
The claimant admitted he did not complete clearance and handing over, thereby causing the delay in payment of terminal dues
Salary arrears of Kshs. 37,130.54 for November and December 2023
The claimant had consented in writing to the reduction of his salary to the 2021 scale
General damages for unfair labour practices
The claim of unfair labour practices failed as the salary reduction was voluntarily accepted and the terminal dues delay was attributable to the claimant
Costs
Since the suit was filed before the partial settlement, the claimant is awarded costs plus interest at court rates from the date of filing the 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.
Consequently, I find that the copy produced by the respondent is the authentic stafi handbook applicable in this case.
I take judicial notice that, 13th salary is normally a bonus pay and not leave allowance.
However, the claim for certificate of service is granted and the Respondent is directed to issue the same as it is a right under section 51 of the Employment Act.
Since the suit was filed before the said partial settlement, the claimant is awarded costs plus interest at court rates from the date of filing the suit.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal inconsistency on the date the claimant signed the salary reduction memo: earlier passages state 24th October 2023 while the conclusion states 2024
Discrepancy in the assessed terminal benefits figure pleaded (Kshs. 267,841) versus the amount computed and paid (Kshs. 297,601.57 gross / Kshs. 217,841 net) and the paragraph 3 admission figure
Mathematical error in the final computation: Kshs. 474,734.64 less Kshs. 297,601.57 should equal Kshs. 177,133.07, not the stated Kshs. 177,133.95
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mutuma v Winners Chapel International (Cause E028 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2426 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2426/eng@2025-09-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.