Download PDF

Kenya Judgment

Employment and Labour Relations Court · Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa

Obobo v Marsyetu Limited [2025] KEELRC 2104 (KLR)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's salary from April to September 2024 and did not follow the statutory procedure for redundancy under Section 40 of the Employment Act. No notice was given to the Labour Officer, and the claimant was not paid terminal dues, including severance pay. The respondent's actions constituted a fundamental breach of contract and statutory obligations, resulting in unfair termination. The court awarded the claimant compensation equivalent to four months' salary, notice pay, salary arrears, severance pay for two years, a certificate of service, and costs, holding that the respondent's failure to comply with due process and statutory requirements rendered the termination unlawful and unfair.

Court disposition

Judgment for the claimant; employment terminated unfairly; monetary and non-monetary reliefs granted.

Orders

  • Employment terminated unfairly.
  • Respondent to pay compensation of Ksh. 479,816.
  • Respondent to pay notice pay of Ksh. 119,954.
  • Respondent to pay salary arrears of Ksh. 719,724.
  • Respondent to pay severance pay of Ksh. 119,954.
  • Respondent to issue certificate of service to the claimant.
  • Respondent to pay costs of the suit.

02

Material facts

Parties

Phiick Obobo

Applicant

Marsyetu Limited

Respondent

Amounts and remedies

  • Compensation (4 Months' Salary): KES 479,816
  • Notice Pay: KES 119,954
  • Salary Arrears (april to September 2024): KES 719,724
  • Severance Pay (2 Years): KES 119,954

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Employment Cause / Judgment

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The claimant argued that the respondent withheld his salary from April to September 2024 without justification, failed to follow the statutory redundancy procedure, did not notify the Labour Officer, and refused to pay terminal dues. He sought declarations of rights violations, compensation for unfair termination, unpaid salaries, notice pay, severance pay, a certificate of service, and costs.
Respondent
The respondent did not file any appearance or response. The matter proceeded unopposed.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Section 40, Employment Act; Cargill Kenya Limited v Mwaka & 3 others [2021] KECA 115 (KLR); National Oil Corporation of Kenya v Cheruiyot & 37 others [2025] KECA 148 (KLR)

    Termination on grounds of redundancy must comply with Section 40 of the Employment Act, including notice to the employee and Labour Officer, and payment of all terminal dues.

  2. 02

    Section 45(5)(b)(ii), Employment Act; Kenya Airways Limited v Aviation & Allied Workers Union Kenya & 3 others [2014] KECA 404 (KLR)

    Failure to follow mandatory redundancy procedures results in unfair termination.

  3. 03

    Sections 17, 51, Employment Act

    Employees are entitled to payment for work done and a certificate of service upon termination.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's salary from April to September 2024 and did not follow the statutory procedure for redundancy under Section 40 of the Employment Act. No notice was given to the Labour Officer, and the claimant was not paid terminal dues, including severance pay. The respondent's actions constituted a fundamental breach of contract and statutory obligations, resulting in unfair termination. The court awarded the claimant compensation equivalent to four months' salary, notice pay, salary arrears, severance pay for two years, a certificate of service, and costs, holding that the respondent's failure to comply with due process and statutory requirements rendered the termination unlawful and unfair.

Obiter and limits

  • Even where redundancy is justified by economic conditions, strict adherence to statutory procedure is mandatory.
  • Non-payment of salary for work done is a fundamental breach of contract and statutory right.

Court disposition

Judgment for the claimant; employment terminated unfairly; monetary and non-monetary reliefs granted.

  • Employment terminated unfairly.
  • Respondent to pay compensation of Ksh. 479,816.
  • Respondent to pay notice pay of Ksh. 119,954.
  • Respondent to pay salary arrears of Ksh. 719,724.
  • Respondent to pay severance pay of Ksh. 119,954.
  • Respondent to issue certificate of service to the claimant.
  • Respondent to pay costs of the suit.

Source and reliance status

Employment and Labour Relations Court

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Employment and Labour Relations Court

Judgment

[2025] KEELRC 2104 (KLR)

Obobo v Marsyetu Limited (Cause 132 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2104 (KLR) (17 July 2025) (Judgment)

Neutral citation: [2025] KEELRC 2104 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa

Cause 132 of 2024

M Mbarũ, J

July 17, 2025

Between

Phiick Obobo

Claimant

and

Marsyetu Limited

Respondent

Judgment

1. The claimant filed the Memorandum of Claim on 9 December 2024 and served the respondent with summons. No appearance of response was filed, so the matter proceeded in the respondent's absence.

2. The claim is that on 9 May 2022, the respondent employed the claimant as a sales representative at a gross monthly salary of Ksh. 119, 954. The claimant worked until April 2024, when the salary due was not paid. No reasons were given for the non-payment.

3. On 19 August 2024, the respondent sent an email to all employees, including the claimant, indicating that salary payment for August 2024 would be delayed and would instead be paid on 15 to 20 of the month. However, there was no payment.

4. The claim is that on 30 October 2024, the respondent issued a letter to the claimant terminating his employment on the grounds of redundancy. Withholding salary from April to September 2024 was a fundamental breach of the employment contract, which required the payment of the due salary at the end of the month.

5. The claim is that the respondent violated the claimant’s right to fair remuneration under section 17 of the Employment Act. The purported termination of employment due to redundancy was unlawful because the respondent failed to issue notice to the Labour Officer, did not follow due process, and refused to pay terminal dues, including severance pay.

6. The claimant is seeking the following,1. A declaration that the withholding of salaries from April to September 2024 was a violation of the claimant’s rights,2. A declaration that the termination of employment on account of redundancy was unlawful and unfair,a.Unpaid salaries from April to September 2024 Ksh.719,724,b.Notice pay Ksh.119,954,c.12 months' compensation Ksh. 1,439,448,d.Certificate of service,e.Costs of the suit.

7. The claimant attended and relied on his documents and statement. In the absence of the respondent and no response having been filed, the court is permitted to rely on the filed records under Rules 59 and 60 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules.

Determination 8. Despite being served with summons, the respondent did not file an appearance or response. This denied the court crucial records and left the claim unchallenged.

9. Based on the claim, a notice dated 27 April 2024 was issued, advising all employees that their salaries would be delayed.A similar notice was issued on 19 August 2024.

10. The final notice on 3 October 2024 indicated that the claimant’s employment had been terminated due to redundancy. The reasons for the daily salary payment and redundancy were that the respondent was facing a decrease in business, which was occasioned by poor economic conditions and high inflation rates.

11. Indeed, the employer is permitted to terminate employment due to a decrease in business, leading to redundancy, under Section 40 of the Employment Act. However, the due process of the law must be observed in such circumstances, as established in Cargill Kenya Limited v Mwaka & 3 others [2021] KECA 115 (KLR) and the case of National Oil Corporation of Kenya v Cheruiyot & 37 others [2025] KECA 148 (KLR). The employer must inform the employees of the intention and extent of the redundancy and notify the Labour Officer responsible for the area.

12. Under section 40(1)(f) of the Employment Act, where the employer must close its business, the law allows the payment in lieu of notice and all pending terminal dues, including leave pay due in cash and severance pay.

13. In this case, the claimant seeks payment for notice, salary arrears, and severance pay. This means the respondent failed to adhere to the minimum standards in section 40 of the Employment Act. In this regard, section 45 (5)(b)(ii) of the Employment Act states that when an employer fails to follow the mandatory procedures when terminating employment for operational reasons, such action results in unfair termination of employment, as held in Kenya Airways Limited v Aviation & Allied Workers Union Kenya & 3 others [2014] KECA 404 (KLR).

14. In this case, without any effort to address the position of section 40 of the Employment Act, even where the respondent had valid reasons to justify a redundancy, such a lapse resulted in unfair termination of employment.

Notice pay is due, and compensation.

15. The respondent employed the claimant from May 2022 to September 2024. Aside from the unfair termination of his employment due to redundancy, which lacked due process, he was willing to fulfil his contractual obligations. In this context, compensation equivalent to four (4) months' gross salary is considered appropriate. This situation is worsened by non-payment of salaries from April to September 2024, contravening the Employment Act.At the wage of Ksh.119, 954 x 4 the due compensation is Ksh.479, 816. Notice pay is due under section 40(1) (f) at Ksh.119, 954.

16. At the end of employment, whatever the reason for termination, the employee is entitled to pay for work done. The claim for unpaid salaries from April to September 2024 is justified at ksh.719, 724.

17. Equally, severance pay is due for the 2 complete years worked at Ksh 119. 954.

18. Under section 51 of the Employment Act, a certificate of service is due at the end of employment.

19. The respondent's failure to comply with due process necessitates these proceedings, and hence, the award of costs is justified.

20. Accordingly, judgment is entered for the claimant against the respondent in the following terms;a.Employment terminated unfairly,b.Compensation Ksh.479,816,c.Notice pay Ksh.119,954,d.Salary arrears ksh.719,724,e.Severance pay Ksh.119,954,f.Certificate of service,g.Costs of the suit.

DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MOMBASA, THIS 17 JULY 2025. M. MBARŨJUDGEIn the presence of:Court Assistant: Japhet……………………………………………… and ……………………………………

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Cargill Kenya Limited v Mwaka & 3 others [2021] KECA 115 (KLR)

Case cited

National Oil Corporation of Kenya v Cheruiyot & 37 others [2025] KECA 148 (KLR)

Case cited

Kenya Airways Limited v Aviation & Allied Workers Union Kenya & 3 others [2014] KECA 404 (KLR)

Case cited

Employment Act, 2007 (Kenya) Sections 17, 40, 45, 51

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.