Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Kenya decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Keya v Crescent Tech Ltd (Appeal E154 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2435 (KLR) (31 August 2026) (Judgment)
The Employment and Labour Relations Court dismissed an appeal challenging a redundancy-based termination, finding notice, consultation, and no proved discrimination.
Ashleys Kenya Ltd v Opiyo (Appeal E357 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2441 (KLR) (31 August 2026) (Judgment)
The court held that the respondent became an employee after a consultancy lapsed, and that the appellant’s termination was unfair for lack of due process.
Mutuku v Zheng Hong (K) Limited (Appeal E356 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2443 (KLR) (31 August 2026) (Judgment)
The court held that the termination was unfair because the employer’s operational shutdown amounted to redundancy without compliance with statutory procedure.
Cheva v Pan Africa Logistics Limited (Environment and Land Case E298 of 2024) [2026] KEMC 811 (KLR) (27 August 2026) (Judgment)
The Court found that although the Respondent proved financial difficulty, it did not prove that the Claimant’s particular role had become redundant in September 2023, nor did it show a fresh redundancy process, fresh notice, Labour Officer notice, or contemporaneous consultation proximate to the actual termination. The 2021 redundancy exercise had been overtaken by continued employment, unpaid leave, and recall to work. The termination was therefore substantively and procedurally unfair under sections 40 and 45 of the Employment Act. The Claimant was awarded severance, admitted outstanding gr…
Source excerpt
Sheikh v Motrex Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 245 of 2019) [2026] KEMC 783 (KLR) (27 August 2026) (Judgment)
The Court held that sleeping while on security duty was a serious dereliction of duty and, given the Claimant’s own admission in the disciplinary minutes, provided a valid and fair substantive reason for dismissal. However, because the Respondent issued the show-cause notice and disciplinary hearing invitation on the same day and heard the Claimant without giving reasonable time to prepare a defence, the termination was procedurally unfair under section 41 of the Employment Act. The Court therefore awarded limited compensation for procedural unfairness only and dismissed the other monetary cl…
Source excerpt
Mithika v Manpower Networks Ltd (Environment and Land Case E601 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 809 (KLR) (27 August 2026) (Judgment)
The Claimant failed to prove that his engagement with the Respondent was a continuous monthly contract or that it converted under section 37 into fixed employment. The documentary evidence showed signed piece-rate engagement terms, variable payments, weekly payrolls and daily engagement records consistent with work-availability-based engagement. Because the Claimant did not establish that the Respondent terminated a subsisting continuous contract on 2nd September 2024, the claims for unfair termination, notice pay, service pay and compensation failed. However, the existence of an employment r…
Source excerpt
Lorna v Cofftea Limited & another (Environment and Land Case E438 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 810 (KLR) (27 August 2026) (Judgment)
The Claimant proved an employment relationship with Tradco Services Limited, proved that her employment ended before the fixed-term contract expiry, and no valid reason or disciplinary process was shown by the Respondents. The termination was therefore substantively and procedurally unfair. However, the court rejected the pleaded salary of KShs. 33,360 and relied on the written contract salary of KShs. 21,000, awarded notice pay, pro-rated leave and four months' compensation, dismissed the public holiday claim for want of proof, and held Tradco Services Limited solely liable.
Source excerpt
Otieno v Kenyatta University (Appeal E064 of 2026) [2026] KEELRC 2390 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal failed because it was fatally defective for want of the decree appealed against, which made the record of appeal incomplete. In any event, the court found that the respondent had proved a valid reason for summary dismissal and followed a fair disciplinary process, so the dismissal was substantively and procedurally justified.
Source excerpt
Proteq-X Security Systems Ltd v Obure (Appeal E056 of 2022) [2026] KEELRC 2388 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal succeeded because the respondent’s refusal to accept lawful redeployment and his subsequent absence from duty amounted to gross misconduct, defeating the unfair termination claim. The court further held that claims for underpayment, overtime, house allowance and rest days were continuing injuries filed outside the statutory limitation period and were therefore not maintainable. However, pay for days worked in August 2019 remained due because the employer produced no proof of payment and the respondent was entitled to wages for work already done.
Source excerpt
Were v Nairobi Chapel & 2 others (Cause 198 of 2020) [2026] KEELRC 2412 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Judgment)
The court held that the employer's conduct in creating financial pressure, inducing resignation, promising an exit package, and then replacing the claimant's position amounted to constructive dismissal. It also held that the bank breached its duty of care by reversing funds from the claimant's account without involving her, so the claimant was entitled to repayment with commercial interest, subject to an offset mechanism against any competing debit balance. The respondents' counterclaims failed because the bank's unilateral reversal was wrongful and the employer did not prove quantified loss…
Source excerpt
Explore more
