Esheria Kenya Case Law
Sign in
Kenya Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Kenya Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Kenya case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Kenya decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Employment and labour law [2026] KECA 1549 (KLR)

National Bank of Kenya Ltd v Banking Insurance & Finance Union Kenya

National Bank of Kenya Ltd v Banking Insurance & Finance Union Kenya (Civil Appeal E204 of 2021) [2026] KECA 1549 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
Civil Appeal E204 of 2021
Judge
["JM Ngugi", "MB Kairaria", "AI Hassan"]

The bank failed to prove a valid reason for dismissing the grievant because the cancelled withdrawal transaction was within her duties, the account was not dormant, the appellant’s own disciplinary panel exonerated her, and the cancellation caused no loss; accordingly the dismissal was unfair and the reinstatement order was justified.

Source excerpt

  • Unfair dismissal
  • Summary dismissal
  • Substantive fairness
  • Procedural fairness
  • Reinstatement
  • Disciplinary hearing
Read case analysis
Employment and labour law [2026] KEELRC 2354 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotels, Educational Institutions, Hospitals and Allied Workers (KUDHEIHA) v Moi University

Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotels, Educational Institutions, Hospitals and Allied Workers (KUDHEIHA) v Moi University (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E040 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2354 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Employment and Labour Relations Cause E040 of 2025
Judge
["MA Onyango"]

The Court held that Moi University had a genuine operational reason for the redundancy, but the process was unlawful because the notice failed to disclose the extent of the redundancy and was not shown to have been served on the labour officer, consultations were incomplete, the selection criteria used by PKF did not comply with section 40(1)(c), and redundancy dues were not proved as paid before release. Reinstatement was declined as impracticable, and compensation was limited to two months' gross salary per affected employee together with outstanding statutory and contractual redundancy due…

Source excerpt

  • Redundancy
  • Procedural fairness
  • Substantive justification
  • Collective bargaining agreement
  • Union consultation
  • Selection criteria
Read case analysis
Employment law [2026] KEELRC 2343 (KLR)

Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union v Del Monte (K) Ltd

Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union v Del Monte (K) Ltd (Cause 92 of 2020) [2026] KEELRC 2343 (KLR) (29 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Cause 92 of 2020
Judge
["DKN Marete"]

The court held that the Respondent substantially complied with the mandatory disciplinary process under section 41 of the Employment Act and had valid, fair grounds to summarily dismiss the grievant because the evidence showed unexplained disappearance of 28 litres of paint, contradictory explanations by the grievant, eyewitness accounts of loading paint onto a company vehicle, and an unsuccessful site inspection. The dismissal was therefore procedurally and substantively fair, defeating all claims for compensation and terminal dues dependent on unfair termination.

Source excerpt

  • Summary dismissal
  • Procedural fairness
  • Substantive fairness
  • Theft/misappropriation of employer property
  • Collective bargaining agreement
  • Section 41 hearing
Read case analysis
Employment and labour relations [2026] KEELRC 2052 (KLR)

Shankar Electronics Limited v Amalgamated Union of Kenya Metal Workers

Shankar Electronics Limited v Amalgamated Union of Kenya Metal Workers (Civil Appeal E123 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2052 (KLR) (16 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Civil Appeal E123 of 2025
Judge
["K Ocharo"]

The appeal failed because the appellant unilaterally and without the respondent's agreement reduced wages governed by a valid CBA, in breach of the CBA and the Employment Act. The evidence showed repeated and express objection by the union and employees, so estoppel, waiver, and acquiescence could not arise. Covid-19 hardship did not legalize self-help, and the appellant had lawful alternatives such as negotiated variation, recourse to court, or redundancy.

Source excerpt

  • Collective bargaining agreement
  • Unilateral salary reduction
  • Covid-19 related wage cuts
  • Estoppel and acquiescence
  • Record of appeal competence
  • Redundancy alternative
Read case analysis
Labour law [2026] KEELRC 2062 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Domestic Hotels' Educational Institutions and Hospital Workers (KUDHEIHA) v Board of Management Kapsabet High School

Kenya Union of Domestic Hotels' Educational Institutions and Hospital Workers (KUDHEIHA) v Board of Management Kapsabet High School (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E028 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2062 (KLR) (16 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Employment and Labour Relations Cause E028 of 2025
Judge
["MA Onyango"]

The Court found that the documents signed by employees were genuine Form S check-off forms, not mere attendance registers, and therefore validly authorized deduction and remittance of union dues under section 48. It further found that the Claimant recruited 82 out of 93 unionisable employees, which satisfied the simple majority threshold under section 54. The Respondent's later employee instructions and internally generated deduction forms could not retrospectively defeat the already accrued right to recognition. The refusal to deduct dues and to recognize the Claimant was therefore unlawful.

Source excerpt

  • Union recruitment
  • Check-off forms
  • Deduction and remittance of union dues
  • Trade union recognition
  • Collective bargaining agreement
  • Simple majority threshold
Read case analysis
Employment law [2026] KEELRC 1982 (KLR)

Achuny v Valley Confectionery Ltd

Achuny v Valley Confectionery Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E058 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 1982 (KLR) (10 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E058 of 2025
Judge
["AN Mwaure"]

The appellant did not prove constructive dismissal. The resignation letter did not establish intolerable working conditions or a fundamental breach by the employer, and the evidence fell short of the objective and causal tests for constructive dismissal. The cross-appeal also failed because the trial court’s award of salary for days worked and half costs was upheld as fair.

Source excerpt

  • Constructive dismissal
  • Resignation
  • Terminal dues
  • Costs
  • Burden of proof
  • Collective bargaining agreement
Read case analysis
Employment and labour law [2026] KEELRC 1963 (KLR)

Kenya County Government Workers Union v County Government of Busia & 4 others

Kenya County Government Workers Union v County Government of Busia & 4 others (Cause E041 of 2024) [2026] KEELRC 1963 (KLR) (9 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Cause E041 of 2024
Judge
["DN Nderitu"]

The Preliminary Objection failed because the claim was anchored on an alleged continuous breach of a CBA that remained in force until replaced, so the limitation arguments were inapplicable on the facts presented. The objection also was not a pure point of law because it depended on disputed factual assertions. The application for leave to file a response out of time was refused because the Respondents repeatedly ignored court directions, offered no credible explanation for the delay, and the court found the application to be a bad-faith attempt to delay proceedings.

Source excerpt

  • Preliminary objection
  • Jurisdiction
  • Limitation periods
  • Collective bargaining agreement
  • Union dues remittance
  • Leave to file response out of time
Read case analysis
Employment law [2026] KEELRC 1941 (KLR)

Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union v Lipton Tea & Infusions Kenya PLC

Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union v Lipton Tea & Infusions Kenya PLC (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E021 of 2024) [2026] KEELRC 1941 (KLR) (9 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Employment and Labour Relations Cause E021 of 2024
Judge
["AN Mwaure"]

The respondent complied with procedure but failed to prove credible and genuine substantive reasons for dismissal. The evidence tying the grievant to illegal plucking was speculative and insufficient, particularly because the asserted connection to Vivian Chepng’eno’s house and the recovered tea leaves was not proved. Since substantive justification and procedural fairness must both be satisfied, the dismissal was unfair and unlawful.

Source excerpt

  • Unfair termination
  • Summary dismissal
  • Substantive justification
  • Procedural fairness
  • Reinstatement
  • Gratuity
Read case analysis
Employment and labour law [2026] KEELRC 1968 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers v Worldwide Movers (Kenya) Limited

Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers v Worldwide Movers (Kenya) Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E114 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 1968 (KLR) (8 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Employment and Labour Relations Cause E114 of 2025
Judge
["HS Wasilwa"]

The preliminary objection failed because this court has territorial jurisdiction countrywide as a court of the status of the High Court, and lack of union recognition does not bar a union from defending its member; accordingly, the objection raised no merit and the dispute should proceed to hearing.

Source excerpt

  • Territorial jurisdiction
  • Pecuniary jurisdiction
  • Trade union recognition
  • Locus standi
  • Preliminary objection
  • Right of union representation
Read case analysis
Employment law [2026] KEELRC 1933 (KLR)

Gicheha & 75 others v Unilever Kenya Ltd & another

Gicheha & 75 others v Unilever Kenya Ltd & another (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 942 of 2017) [2026] KEELRC 1933 (KLR) (3 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Employment and Labour Relations Cause 942 of 2017
Judge
["JW Keli"]

The court held that the outsourcing contract was valid and that the 2nd respondent, not the 1st respondent, was the claimants' employer. However, because the claimants' employment ended without notice when the outsourcing arrangement expired, the termination was unfair to that extent. The CBA did not apply because the claimants were not employees of the 1st respondent. Relief was therefore limited to statutory entitlements against the 2nd respondent.

Source excerpt

  • Outsourcing
  • Employment relationship
  • Redundancy
  • Unfair termination
  • Collective bargaining agreement
  • Casual employment conversion
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Kenya decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.