Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
IndustrialAllowedCause 20 of 2003

Kenya Building, Construction, Timber, Furniture & Allied Industries Employees’ Union v Mareba Eldoret Ltd (Cause 20 of 2003) [2004] KEIC 2 (KLR)

Industrial Court at Nairobi
19 February 2004
CCCP Chemuttut
644 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court approved a negotiated settlement paying 45 retrenched workers Kshs. 4.46 million in redundancy benefits through monthly instalments.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Minister for Labour, exercising powers under Section 8 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234, referred to the Industrial Court a dispute concerning the refusal by Mareba Eldoret Ltd to pay redundancy benefits to 45 named employees (the grievants). The reference, accompanied by statutory certificates from the Labour Commissioner and the Minister, was received on 8th April 2003. The Company repeatedly failed to file a reply statement or attend hearings, despite directions and adjournments. At the hearing on 29th October 2003 counsel for the Company obtained an adjournment to pursue an out-of-court settlement. The parties subsequently filed a memorandum of settlement dated 19th December 2003, signed by their respective advocates, by which the amount due was agreed at Kshs. 4,455,251.40, payable in twenty-nine instalments of Kshs. 150,000/= each and one instalment of Kshs. 105,251.40, commencing 1st December 2003 and on the first day of each succeeding month until payment in full. The judge found the terms fair and reasonable and entered an award by consent adopting them. This was a first-instance disposal by consent; the grievants thereby obtained their redundancy benefits through the agreed instalment plan. No costs order was made and no previous decision was reviewed.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the terms of the memorandum of settlement dated 19th December 2003, agreed between the Union and the Company in respect of redundancy benefits for 45 grievants, are fair and reasonable and should be adopted as an award by consent

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the consensual settlement of the redundancy benefits dispute should be adopted as an award

Holding

The Court adopted the settlement as an award by consent, having satisfied itself that the terms were fair and reasonable.

Reasoning

The Minister for Labour referred the dispute over unpaid redundancy benefits for 45 employees to the Court under Section 8 of the Trade Disputes Act. After failed hearings and an adjournment to explore settlement, the parties filed a signed memorandum of settlement fixing the amount due at Kshs. 4,455,251.40 payable in 30 instalments. The judge, exercising the Court's supervisory function over consent settlements, considered the terms fair and reasonable and entered judgment in those terms.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A memorandum of settlement between parties to a trade dispute referred to the Industrial Court, once found fair and reasonable by the Court, is adopted and entered as an award by consent and becomes binding as such.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Award entered by consent adopting the memorandum of settlement dated 19th December 2003
  2. 2.The Company to pay the agreed sum of Kshs. 4,455,251.40 to the grievants
  3. 3.Payment to be settled in twenty-nine (29) instalments of Kshs. 150,000/= each and one instalment of Kshs. 105,251.40, commencing the first day of December 2003 and thereafter on the first day of each succeeding month until payment in full

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

CC
majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Section 8 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234 (reference by the Minister for Labour)

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.

In my humble consideration, the terms of the amicable settlement are fair and reasonable, and I enter an award by consent as above.
p. 3Adoption of consent settlement as award
The amount now due has been agreed at Kshs.4,455,251.40.
p. 2Agreed quantum payable to grievants
The said amount be settled in twenty-nine (29) instalments of Kshs.150,000/= each and one of Kshs.105,251.40, commencing the first day of December 2003 and thereafter on the first day of each succeeding month until payment in full.
p. 2Payment schedule forming part of the final orders

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Building, Construction, Timber, Furniture & Allied Industries Employees’ Union v Mareba Eldoret Ltd (Cause 20 of 2003) [2004] KEIC 2 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2004). Cause 20 of 2003. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keic/2004/2/eng@2004-02-19

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