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

Cyrus Muinde Maundu v Albert Marangu t/a Glorious Preparatory School [2018] KEELRC 1991 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 1991 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
1991
Citation
[2018] KEELRC 1991 (KLR)
Decided
6 April 2018
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

TypeUnfair DismissalPostureAppeal from an original trialCoramRadido Stephen
The Court finds the employment commenced in February 2007 and concludes there was unfair termination of employment.

Facts

The Claimant, Cyrus Muinde Maundu, claimed unfair dismissal from his employment with the Respondent, Albert Marangu t/a Glorious Preparatory School, which he alleged began in February 2007. The Respondent disputed the commencement date and claimed the employment was a volunteer position until 2008.

Issues

  • when the employment commenced
  • whether there was unfair dismissal

Reasoning

The Court determined the employment commenced in February 2007 based on the Respondent's introduction letter to Equity Bank Ltd. The Respondent failed to provide a written contract and did not demonstrate attempts to have the Claimant show cause for not reporting to work.

Outcome

The Court awards the Claimant pay in lieu of notice (Kshs 8,500) and compensation (Kshs 25,500) totaling Kshs 34,000.

Orders

  • The Respondent to pay the Claimant Kshs 34,000

Remedies

  • Pay in lieu of notice
  • Compensation

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act, 2007
Cases cited (3)
  • Philomena Aromba Mbalasi v Uni-Truck World Ltd (2015) eKLR
  • London Transport Executive v Clarke (1981) IRLR 166
  • Geys v Societe Generale, London Branch (2012) UKSC 63
⚠ 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