SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Samuel Lukayo Agumi v Haco Industries Ltd [2013] KEELRC 219 (KLR)

[2013] KEELRC 219 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
219
Citation
[2013] KEELRC 219 (KLR)
Decided
14 August 2013
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeUnlawful DismissalPostureClaimant seeks compensation for unlawful dismissal, terminal dues, and housing allowance.CoramMATHEWS N. NDUMA
The Claimant worked continuously for seven years and was not a casual. The dismissal was substantively and procedurally unfair, and the court orders compensation.

Facts

Claimant was employed as a store attendant from November 2, 2000, and was dismissed on February 15, 2009, for theft by servant. He was acquitted in February 2009 and denied leave and housing allowance.

Issues

  • Whether the Claimant was a casual employee.
  • Whether the dismissal was substantively and procedurally unfair.
  • Whether the Claimant is entitled to compensation for unlawful dismissal.

Reasoning

The court found the Claimant worked continuously for seven years and was not a casual. The dismissal was unfair due to unfounded allegations and lack of evidence.

Outcome

The court orders the Respondent to pay Kshs.108,430 in compensation, including one month's salary in lieu of notice, payment in lieu of leave, and compensation for unlawful dismissal.

Orders

  • Payment of Kshs.7,800 in lieu of notice.
  • Payment of Kshs.38,230 in lieu of leave.
  • Compensation of Kshs.62,400 for unlawful dismissal.

Remedies

  • Compensation of Kshs.108,430.
  • Payment of costs of the suit.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act No. 11 of 2007
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case