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 law [2026] KEELRC 2388 (KLR)

Proteq-X Security Systems Ltd v Obure (Appeal E056 of 2022)

Proteq-X Security Systems Ltd v Obure (Appeal E056 of 2022) [2026] KEELRC 2388 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Appeal E056 of 2022
Judge
["M Mbarũ"]

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

  • Unfair termination
  • Summary dismissal
  • Absconding duty
  • Underpayment
  • Overtime
  • Rest days
Read case analysis
Employment and labour law [2026] KEELRC 2383 (KLR)

Cale Infrastructure Company Ltd v Sitati & 2 others (Appeal E059, E005 & E058 of 2025 (Consolidated))

Cale Infrastructure Company Ltd v Sitati & 2 others (Appeal E059, E005 & E058 of 2025 (Consolidated)) [2026] KEELRC 2383 (KLR) (12 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Appeal E059 of 2025
Judge
["NJ Abuodha"]

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

  • Unfair termination
  • Redundancy procedure
  • Fixed-term contracts
  • Legitimate expectation
  • Nssf employment records
  • Notice pay
Read case analysis
Employment law [2026] KEELRC 2382 (KLR)

Mutwiwa v Trinity Kindergarten Preparatory School (Appeal E213 of 2025)

Mutwiwa v Trinity Kindergarten Preparatory School (Appeal E213 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2382 (KLR) (12 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Appeal E213 of 2025
Judge
["NJ Abuodha"]

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

  • Unfair termination
  • Summary dismissal
  • Procedural fairness
  • Substantive fairness
  • Burden of proof
  • Compensation for unfair termination
Read case analysis
Employment and labour law [2026] KEMC 468 (KLR)

Mangale v Professional Clean Care Ltd

Mangale v Professional Clean Care Ltd (Cause E570 of 2024) [2026] KEMC 468 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Magistrate's Court
Case number
Cause E570 of 2024
Judge
["EM Mwamuye"]

The Respondent effectively terminated the Claimant by removing him from duty, ceasing to provide work, and placing him on indefinite unpaid leave without a definite recall or redeployment date. That action was unsupported by a lawful procedure: no notice to show cause, disciplinary hearing, or section 41 protections were shown. Although client complaints provided a factual basis for administrative action, the Respondent failed to prove a valid and fair reason for indefinitely withholding work and wages. The termination was therefore unfair, warranting notice pay, accrued leave and partial com…

Source excerpt

  • Unfair termination
  • Procedural fairness
  • Substantive justification for termination
  • Indefinite unpaid leave as constructive termination
  • Notice pay
  • Accrued leave
Read case analysis
Employment and labour law [2026] KEMC 446 (KLR)

Chivuto v Ready Consultancy Ltd

Chivuto v Ready Consultancy Ltd (Cause E487 of 2022) [2026] KEMC 446 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Magistrate's Court
Case number
Cause E487 of 2022
Judge
["EM Mwamuye"]

The Respondent's pleading and evidence supported a termination for gross misconduct based on alleged absenteeism, but it produced no records or disciplinary material to prove a valid reason, and it also failed to show compliance with section 41. Its contradictory submissions could not override the pleadings and evidence. The Court therefore found the termination substantively and procedurally unfair and awarded notice pay, five months' compensation, and accrued leave, while rejecting unproved claims for house allowance, overtime, service pay, and NHIF.

Source excerpt

  • Unfair termination
  • Procedural fairness
  • Substantive fairness
  • Burden of proof
  • Notice pay
  • Compensation for unfair dismissal
Read case analysis
Employment and labour law [2026] KEELRC 2248 (KLR)

Oruku v Captain Hawk Security Services Limited

Oruku v Captain Hawk Security Services Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E086 of 2022) [2026] KEELRC 2248 (KLR) (28 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Employment and Labour Relations Cause E086 of 2022
Judge
["PA Ndege"]

The claimant’s evidence remained uncontroverted in any material respect because the respondent called no witness and produced no evidence; its bare denial did not displace the claim. The court therefore found no basis to vary the earlier ex parte judgment and entered judgment for the claimant in the sum claimed, together with costs.

Source excerpt

  • Underpayment of wages
  • Overtime
  • Off-duty compensation
  • Public holiday pay
  • Leave pay
  • Service pay
Read case analysis
Employment law [2026] KEELRC 1906 (KLR)

Wafula v Marshalls Security Group Ltd

Wafula v Marshalls Security Group Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E056 of 2020) [2026] KEELRC 1906 (KLR) (3 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E056 of 2020
Judge
["JW Keli"]

The court found, on re-evaluation of the record, that the appellant had likely been given four off days and failed to return to duty, so the respondent had a valid substantive reason based on absconding. However, the respondent did not issue a warning or otherwise notify the appellant of its intention to terminate employment, despite having his contact details, and therefore failed the procedural fairness requirement under section 41. The trial court was thus wrong to dismiss the claim entirely. Only the claim for notice pay was supported as compensation for procedural unfairness; the other m…

Source excerpt

  • Unfair termination
  • Absconding/desertion of duty
  • Procedural fairness under section 41
  • Notice pay
  • Leave pay
  • Overtime
Read case analysis
Employment and labour law [2026] KEELRC 1822 (KLR)

Swaleh v Associated Construction Company (K) Ltd

Swaleh v Associated Construction Company (K) Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E026 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 1822 (KLR) (24 June 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E026 of 2025
Judge
["K Ocharo"]

The court held that the separation on 7 February 2022 was a temporary release from work, not a final termination of employment. Because the appellant failed to prove that termination occurred, the unfair termination claim collapsed under section 47(5) of the Employment Act. The remaining monetary claims were either dependent on the failed termination claim or were time-barred continuing injury claims, so the dismissal of the suit and the order on costs were upheld.

Source excerpt

  • Unfair termination
  • Constructive dismissal
  • Burden of proof in employment claims
  • Time-bar for continuing injury claims
  • Notice pay
  • Leave pay
Read case analysis
Employment law [2026] KEELRC 1549 (KLR)

Kenya NPSWU v Gyto Success Company Ltd

Kenya NPSWU v Gyto Success Company Ltd (Cause 942 of 2018) [2026] KEELRC 1549 (KLR) (5 June 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Cause 942 of 2018
Judge
["NJ Abuodha"]

The court found that the respondent failed to prove the alleged resignation and failed to defend or justify the termination despite conciliation attempts and its duty to maintain employment records. On that basis, the court held that the grievant was unfairly terminated. However, the court limited relief to notice pay and six months’ compensation, rejected gratuity and severance for lack of evidential and legal basis, and rejected leave, house allowance, public holiday and overtime claims as time-barred continuing injuries.

Source excerpt

  • Unfair termination
  • Burden of proof
  • Resignation versus dismissal
  • Minimum wage underpayment
  • Notice pay
  • Compensation for unfair termination
Read case analysis
Employment law [2026] KEELRC 1503 (KLR)

Masinde v Radar Limited (Appeal E208 of 2024)

Masinde v Radar Limited (Appeal E208 of 2024) [2026] KEELRC 1503 (KLR) (29 May 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Case number
Appeal E208 of 2024
Judge
["NJ Abuodha"]

The appellant’s employment could not lawfully be treated as having expired on a 52-week fixed term from 2000 when he had served continuously for over 17 years and the termination letter did not rely on expiry of that contract. The real reason was loss of the bank security services contract due to theft incidents unrelated to the appellant, which amounted to redundancy. Because the respondent did not comply with section 40 of the Employment Act, the termination was unfair. The appellant proved entitlement to the statutory dues claimed, but not special damages, and compensation was limited to s…

Source excerpt

  • Fixed term contracts
  • Redundancy
  • Unfair termination
  • Burden of proof
  • House allowance
  • Overtime
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.