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

James Ngunia Kinyua v Oserian Development Company Limited (Cause 93 of 2016) [2017] KEELRC 1865 (KLR) (31 January 2017) (Judgment)

[2017] KEELRC 1865 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
1865
Citation
[2017] KEELRC 1865 (KLR)
Decided
31 January 2017
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

TypeEmployment DisputePostureClaimant's Amended Statement of Claim vs Respondent's Memorandum of ResponseCoramD. K. N. Marete
The court found the termination of the employment to be wrongful, unfair, and unlawful.

Facts

The claimant, James Ngunia Kinyua, was employed by the respondent, Oserian Development Company Limited, as an Inventory Control Manager on 13th April, 2006. He was terminated on grounds of redundancy on 28th January, 2016, with a notice period ending on 27th February, 2016. The claimant was offered a further three months of work and a severance package of 15 days, which he contested as unfair.

Issues

  • Whether the termination of the employment was wrongful, unfair, and unlawful.
  • Whether the claimant is entitled to the relief sought.
  • Who should pay costs of the suit.

Reasoning

The court held that the termination notice was inadequate and did not comply with the Employment Act, 2007, which requires employers to notify the labour officer of impending redundancy.

Outcome

The claimant is entitled to the relief sought.

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to pay the claimant the relief sought.

Remedies

  • The claimant is entitled to the relief sought.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act, 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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case