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
Mutuma v DHL Worldwide Express Kenya Limited [2025] KEELRC 2153 (KLR)
The court found the claimant’s dismissal procedurally and substantively unfair, awarded six months’ compensation and notice pay, and ordered return of the company Prado.
Chitiavi v Musyoka & another [2025] KEELRC 2154 (KLR)
The ELRC allowed an employment appeal, finding the claimant was unfairly and unlawfully dismissed and awarding compensation, notice pay, service pay, and unpaid salary.
Otana v Equity Bank Limited [2025] KECA 1324 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal found that the appellant was notified of the disciplinary hearing by telephone and failed to attend, thereby locking himself out of the procedural fairness safeguards provided by law. The court held that section 41(1) of the Employment Act does not require written notice, only that the employee be notified and given an opportunity to be heard. The appellant's refusal to attend on the basis of pending criminal proceedings was not justified, as criminal and disciplinary processes are distinct and can proceed concurrently. The court further found that the respondent's interna…
Source excerpt
Mbogo v Harley’s Limited [2025] KEELRC 2147 (KLR)
The court found the claimant’s dismissal was not redundancy, but it was procedurally unfair because the employer did not conduct a proper section 41 hearing.
Brink Security Services Limited v Katenge [2025] KEELRC 2156 (KLR)
The court partly allowed an employment appeal, upholding unfair termination findings but setting aside overtime and house allowance awards for lack of proof.
Muthui v Kitui Flour Mills Limited [2025] KEELRC 2114 (KLR)
The court found summary dismissal procedurally unfair but upheld the employer’s counterclaim for the admitted balance of misappropriated funds.
Mumali v Blink Studio Limited [2025] KEELRC 2112 (KLR)
The court found that the claimant breached his employment contract by failing to attend mandatory trainings, failing to report to work as required, and breaching confidentiality obligations. The evidence established that the claimant absconded duty and had no intention of returning to work, amounting to desertion as defined in law and the employment contract. The respondent's issuance of a termination letter was deemed acceptance of the claimant's repudiation of the contract. The court held that the termination was not unfair or unlawful, as the respondent followed fair procedure and had vali…
Source excerpt
Ojwang v Kenya Power & Lighting Co (KPLC) [2025] KEELRC 2068 (KLR)
The court found that while the respondent had a valid substantive reason to terminate the claimant's employment based on evidence of his involvement in facilitating an illegal power connection, the process was procedurally flawed. The respondent failed to provide the claimant with the investigation report prior to the disciplinary hearing, impairing his right to a fair hearing as required by Section 41 of the Employment Act and relevant case law. This procedural lapse rendered the termination unfair within the meaning of Section 45(4) and (5) of the Employment Act. The court declined the clai…
Source excerpt
Alwang’a v Cedar Springs Limited [2025] KEELRC 2073 (KLR)
The court allowed an employment claim for unfair termination, awarding notice pay, compensation, underpayment, and house allowance after the respondent led no evidence.
Nannungi v Kimondo Gachoka & Company Advocates [2025] KEELRC 2012 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent had valid and fair reasons to terminate the claimant's employment, including failure to attend court, failure to file required applications, and failure to defend on fraud, all of which the claimant admitted or failed to adequately explain. The disciplinary process followed statutory and contractual requirements: the claimant was notified of the charges, given an opportunity to respond, and invited to a disciplinary hearing with the right to be accompanied. The absence of the claimant's supervisor from the committee did not prejudice her defence, as the cha…
Source excerpt
Explore more
