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

Susan Achieng Ohaga v Kiganjo Bakery Limited [2016] KEELRC 484 (KLR)

[2016] KEELRC 484 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
484
Citation
[2016] KEELRC 484 (KLR)
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

TypeWrongful DismissalPostureAppeal from an original trial decisionCoramBYRAM ONGAYA
The termination was unfair due to lack of notice and hearing, and the claimant's contribution to her termination.

Facts

The claimant, Susan Achieng Ohaga, was employed by Kiganjo Bakery Limited from 2002. On June 26, 2013, she brought Mandazi to the workplace and was found in possession of it on June 27, 2013. She was dismissed for baking the Mandazi using the employer's property despite previous verbal warnings.

Issues

  • Whether the termination was unfair
  • Whether the claimant is entitled to 12 months' pay for compensation
  • Whether the claimant is entitled to other remedies as prayed for

Reasoning

The court found that the claimant was not given a notice and a hearing as required by the Employment Act, and there was no evidence that she used the employer's property to bake the Mandazi.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the claimant, awarding compensation and other remedies.

Orders

  • The respondent to pay the claimant Kshs. 109, 081.00 by 01.12.2016
  • The respondent to pay the claimant's costs of the suit

Remedies

  • Compensation for wrongful dismissal
  • Pay in lieu of leave for 2013
  • Pay for June 2013

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Employment Act, 2004
  • Employment Act, 2007
Cases cited (1)
  • Shankar Saklani –Versus- DHL Global Forwarding (K) Limited [2012]eKLR
⚠ 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