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.
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.
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
Ruma v Proto Energy Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E591 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 781 (KLR) (27 August 2026) (Judgment)
The Court held that the Respondent proved a valid substantive reason for disciplinary action because the Claimant reported to an LPG safety-sensitive shift after consuming alcohol, but the dismissal was procedurally unfair because the Claimant was given an unreasonably compressed opportunity to answer the Notice to Show Cause and prepare for the hearing. The Claimant therefore succeeded only on procedural unfairness and limited monetary relief.
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
Cale Infrastructure Company Ltd v Sitati & 2 others (Appeal E059, E005 & E058 of 2025 (Consolidated)) [2026] KEELRC 2383 (KLR) (12 August 2026) (Judgment)
The court upheld the subordinate courts on liability because the appellant failed to rebut the respondents’ evidence that employment continued beyond the alleged contract end dates and failed to prove lawful redundancy or fair termination procedure. However, it interfered with the quantum of damages where the trial courts used unsupported salary bases or awarded excessive compensation, substituting lower awards anchored on the proved contractual or gross pay and statutory entitlements.
Source excerpt
Mutwiwa v Trinity Kindergarten Preparatory School (Appeal E213 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2382 (KLR) (12 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appellate court found that the Respondent failed to prove the alleged competing school, failed to justify the termination reason, and failed to comply with the mandatory disciplinary hearing requirements under section 41 of the Employment Act. The dismissal was therefore substantively and procedurally unfair, and the Appellant was entitled to compensation and related employment dues.
Source excerpt
Moraa v Gyto Security Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E087 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2381 (KLR) (7 August 2026) (Judgment)
The respondent called no evidence to prove desertion or any lawful basis for termination, so the appellant's termination was substantively and procedurally unfair. Notice pay was due because summary dismissal was not justified. Underpayment was proved on the basis of the applicable statutory minimum wage, and compensation for unfair termination had to be recalculated using that lawful minimum rather than the unlawfully depressed wage actually paid. House allowance succeeded because the respondent proved no contractual or evidential basis for an all-inclusive salary, but leave pay and public h…
Source excerpt
Njeu v Kenya Veterinary Vaccine Production Institute & another (Cause E263 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2360 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)
The Claimant’s cause of action arose in 2005, long before the Employment Act, 2007 came into force, and even on a continuing-injury basis the suit was filed more than twelve months after retirement in July 2023. The claim was therefore time-barred, incompetent, and beyond the Court’s jurisdiction.
Source excerpt
Yejoka Garden Restaurant Limited v Ambuchi (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E042 of 2024) [2026] KEELRC 2247 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal succeeded only in part. The court upheld the trial court’s factual finding that the Respondent absconded duty, but held that this finding was legally inconsistent with any declaration of unfair and unlawful dismissal or an award of compensation for unfair termination. Those elements were set aside. The monetary awards for salary arrears, house allowance, public holidays worked, unpaid leave, and service pay were affirmed because they were supported by evidence and did not depend on a finding of unfair termination. Costs of the trial were set aside, each party bearing its own costs…
Source excerpt
Explore more
