Ngeno v Pride Kings Security Services Ltd (Appeal E047 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 3617 (KLR) (15 December 2025) (Judgment)

Ngeno v Pride Kings Security Services Ltd (Appeal E047 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 3617 (KLR) (15 December 2025) (Judgment)

The appellant failed to prove constructive dismissal or entitlement to the claimed dues. Claims presented outside statutory timelines are barred by limitation. The trial court’s findings on lack of evidence for leave and underpayment were correct. The appeal is dismissed for lack of merit.

Citation
[2025] KEELRC 3617 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Cheruiyot Robert Ngeno; Respondent: Pride Kings Security Services Ltd
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
15 December 2025
Case Number
Appeal E047 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Unfair Termination, Statutory Entitlements, Limitation of Actions, Terminal Dues
Source Language
English
Employment Law Labour Law Constructive Dismissal Unfair Termination Statutory Entitlements Limitation of Actions Terminal Dues

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cheruiyot Robert Ngeno

Appellant

Pride Kings Security Services Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was constructively dismissed or voluntarily resigned
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was entitled to terminal and contractual dues independently of unfair termination
  3. 3 Whether the claims for underpayment, unpaid wages, leave, housing allowance, holidays, overtime, and service pay were statute barred or constituted continuing injury

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to prove constructive dismissal or entitlement to the claimed dues. Claims presented outside statutory timelines are barred by limitation. The trial court’s findings on lack of evidence for leave and underpayment were correct. The appeal is dismissed for lack of merit.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Each party to bear their own costs