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

Mgandi Yawa Chikachi v Suleiman Abdul R. Ladha [2018] KEELRC 2391 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 2391 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2391
Citation
[2018] KEELRC 2391 (KLR)
Decided
16 February 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

TypeEmployment DisputePostureClaimant's AppealCoramJames Rika
Termination was unfair, and the Respondent is ordered to pay the Claimant 1 month salary in lieu of notice, service pay, annual leave pay, and compensation for unfair termination.

Facts

The Claimant, Mgandi Yawa Chikachi, was employed as a Houseboy by the Respondent, Suleiman Abdul R. Ladha, from November 2010. The contract was terminated without notice or just cause in October 2015. The Claimant sought compensation for unpaid salary, severance pay, and other damages.

Issues

  • Unfair termination
  • Pro-rata annual leave
  • Holiday pay

Reasoning

The Respondent did not present charges to the Claimant and did not hear him, leading to an unfair termination. The Claimant was not granted holiday pay as his computation was not in accordance with the General Wages Order.

Outcome

Claimant wins

Orders

  • 1 month salary in lieu of notice at Kshs. 6,000
  • service pay at Kshs. 17,307
  • annual leave pay at Kshs. 24,230
  • compensation for unfair termination at Kshs. 72,000

Remedies

  • Compensation for unfair termination
  • Annual leave pay
  • Service pay
  • Salary in lieu of notice

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act
⚠ 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