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

Josephat Muthama Munywoki v Crown Industries Limited [2018] KEELRC 1709 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 1709 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
1709
Citation
[2018] KEELRC 1709 (KLR)
Decided
22 June 2018
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeUnfair DismissalPostureClaimant vs RespondentCoramBYRAM ONGAYA
Holding

The termination was unfair due to lack of due process and valid reasons. The claimant is entitled to a declaration of unfair dismissal, 6 months' salaries, service gratuity, and 11,270 in lieu of notice.

Facts

The claimant, Josephat Muthama Munywoki, was employed as a machine operator from November 2004 to March 1, 2008. He was dismissed on August 5, 2013, for refusing to acknowledge receipt of a warning letter. The dismissal was based on allegations of disrespectful language and refusal to follow check-in procedures.

Issues

  1. Whether the termination was unfair.
  2. Whether the claimant is entitled to the remedies as prayed for.

Reasoning

The court found the show-cause letter to be prophetic and the ground for termination different from the dismissal letter, thus the termination was unfair. The claimant's long service and previous warnings were considered, leading to the award of 6 months' salaries.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the claimant.

Orders

  • The respondent to pay the claimant Kshs.101,430 by 01.08.2018.
  • The respondent to pay the claimant's costs of the suit.

Remedies

  • Declaration of unfair dismissal.
  • 6 months' salaries.
  • Service gratuity.
  • 11,270 in lieu of notice.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Employment Act, 2007
  • Section 41, 43, 35, 90
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case