Ado & another v Mandera Water & Sewerage Company Limited & 2 others (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E150 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2771 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment Court in Nairobi awarded two former board members Kshs 980,000 in allowances, less than they claimed, because regulations cap how many meetings count.
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 parties' failure to agree on a consent computation required the court to determine the correct allowances payable
- 2.How many full board meetings and committee sittings the Applicants were entitled to from June 2020 to August 2023 under the Water Act and the Water Services Regulatory Board Corporate Governance Guidelines
- 3.What rates of allowances applied under the Salaries and Remuneration Commission Guidelines of 16th April 2014
- 4.The total amounts payable to each Applicant
Key legal issues
#Number of board and committee sittings payable
The Applicants were entitled to 19 full board meetings and 12 committee sittings between June 2020 and August 2023, not the 20 and 14 tabulated by the Applicants.
Regulation 3.7.2 of the Corporate Guidelines for water services 2018 caps committee sittings at 4 per financial year, and Regulation 3.7.3 caps board meetings at 6 per year. Full board meetings fell every two months (18 from June 2020 to June 2023, plus one in August before expiry = 19). Committee meetings fell every three months (12), with no further sitting possible before contract expiry in August 2023.
Rates of allowances
The Salaries and Remuneration Guidelines of 16th April 2014 applied, stipulating Kshs 15,000/= for a chairperson and Kshs 10,000/= for members.
The court applied the SRC Guidelines communicated vide letter dated 16th April 2014, as directed in its earlier ruling, together with Government Circular MSPS.2/1A VOL111/1A (119) dated 2nd August 2023. The chairperson rate of Kshs 15,000/= applied to the 1st Applicant as chair of the two committees, and the member rate of Kshs 10,000/= to the 2nd Applicant and to full board sittings.
Respondent's non-participation in the computation
Having failed to respond to the Applicants' proposed computations or file its own, the Respondents were treated as not objecting, and the court proceeded on the Applicants' tabulation as adjusted by law.
The Applicants' advocates wrote to the Respondents' advocates on 6th November 2024 attaching proposed computations; there was no response and no independent computation was filed. The court therefore determined the matter on the Applicants' tabulation, subject to correction against the regulatory caps on meeting frequency.
Legal principles established
#- Where regulations prescribe the number of meetings, the party alleging fewer meetings occurred bears the burden of proving it; failing proof, the statutory/regulatory entitlement is payable.
- The applicable allowance rates were those in the Salaries and Remuneration Commission Guidelines of 16th April 2014: Kshs 15,000/= for chairperson and Kshs 10,000/= for members.
Court orders
#- 1.The court found and held that the amounts due to the Applicants is Kshs 980,000/=, comprising Kshs 550,000/= for the 1st Applicant and Kshs 430,000/= for the 2nd Applicant
- 2.The petitioners shall have the costs of the petition
- 3.The petition is marked finally determined by the court
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Jurisdiction not expressly stated; ruling flows from the court's prior directions of 25th October 2024 in the pending petition, referencing the Public Finance Management Act and the Water Act
Relief refused
#The Applicants' tabulated computation of Kshs 1,100,000/= plus taxed costs of Kshs 231,550/= (total Kshs 1,331,550/=) was not adopted in full
The court recalculated entitlement at 19 full board meetings and 12 committee sittings rather than the 20 and 14 claimed, reducing the total to Kshs 980,000/=
Costs
The petitioners shall further have the costs of the petition.
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 court therefore finds and holds that the amounts due to the Applicants is Kshs 980,000/= .
This order therefore concludes this matter and the petition is marked finally determined by the court.
The petitioners shall further have the costs of the petition.
This therefore meant that unless the Respondent could prove that the meetings were less than the required ones by the regulations the Applicants were entitled to those meetings and sittings per year.
Regulation 3.7.2 provides that the committees shall not have more than 4 sittings in a financial year.
Issues in the judgment
#The court's identity and the case number are not stated in the judgment; the signature block describes the judge as 'PRESIDING JUDGE-APPEALS DIVISION', which is inconsistent with a first-instance petition determination, and the reference to 'the petition' is unexplained.
The judgment inconsistently refers to the applicants as 'Applicants' and 'petitioners'.
The judgment states the Applicants' services were terminated in June 2020 while earlier directions contemplate allowances from June 2020 to August 2023, and the tabulation period description is internally inconsistent.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ado & another v Mandera Water & Sewerage Company Limited & 2 others (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E150 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2771 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2771/eng@2025-10-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.