It is a big win for DHL Worldwide Express Kenya Limited after the Court of Appeal suspended the Ksh 9.1 million compensation awarded to its former finance officer over the illegal termination of his employment
In a recent ruling rendered by a three-judge bench of the appellant court Justices Gatembu Kairu, Jessie Lesiit, and Ngenye Macharia issued an interim order halting DHL to pay the Sh9.1 million compensation awarded to Oliver Matiko pending determination of an appeal by the international shipping, courier services, and transportation firm.
The former chief finance officer had been awarded Millions of shillings by the Employment and Labour Relationship Judge Ongaya following a successive case over his illegal firing by his former Employer DHL.
While issuing the conservatory orders, the appellant judges said they were satisfied that the company had established to their satisfaction that the firm had an arguable appeal.
The court agreed with DHL that Matiko might be incapable of repaying the money if the firm’s appeal succeeds.
“In the circumstances, we allow the application dated 27th November 2023, and grant a stay of execution of the judgment of the Employment and Labour Relations Court dated 27th November 2023 pending the hearing and determination of Civil Appeal No. E106 of 2024,” the judges said.
The company faulted the judge for applying a higher standard of proof, misapprehending the facts and evidence adduced, and therefore failing to evaluate the evidence in its entirety.
DHL further accused the judge of misapprehending the senior position and role of the former employee in the approval of the unauthorized amendments to the 2018 and 2019 Employees’ Handbook.
The company was apprehensive that the former employee would undoubtedly move to enforce the court decision by demanding the payment of the amount.
The company contended that the execution process had commenced as it has been served with a Notice of Taxation dated 5th February 2024 and that Mwita’s Party & Party Bill of Costs is set to be taxed on 8th February 2024.
In addition, it is apprehensive that it will be unable to recover the said sum of money from Mwita if the colossal decretal sum is paid as per the impugned judgment as Mwita’s means are unknown to it.
Mwita opposed the appeal arguing that the company the applicant has no arguable appeal.
He argued that the application for stay has since been overtaken by events and it is therefore futile for the Court to grant an order of stay.
