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

Aggrey Ateya Musanga v Ken Knit (K) Ltd [2019] KEELRC 2602 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 2602 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2602
Citation
[2019] KEELRC 2602 (KLR)
Decided
28 November 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
Typetermination of employmentPostureoriginal trialCoramAbuodha Jorum Nelson
Holding

The termination of employment was not fair as there was no valid reason to terminate the Claimant's service. The Claimant was ordered to be paid one month's salary in lieu of notice, salary for the period in suspension, and costs of the suit.

Facts

Claimant was employed by Respondent from March 2000 until December 2013. He was suspended on December 6, 2013, and later reinstated. The Claimant was accused of siphoning fuel from the vehicle he was in charge of.

Issues

  1. whether the termination of employment was fair
  2. the amount of compensation to be paid to the Claimant

Reasoning

The court found that the police investigation did not link the Claimant with the theft of fuel, and the respondent's decision to reinstate the Claimant was an admission that there was no valid reason to terminate his service. However, the Claimant's failure to resume duties mitigated the respondent's blameworthiness.

Outcome

Claimant wins

Orders

  • Claimant to be paid one month's salary in lieu of notice
  • Claimant to be paid salary for the period in suspension
  • Claimant to be paid costs of the suit

Remedies

  • Compensation for one month's salary in lieu of notice
  • Compensation for salary during suspension
  • Payment of legal costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act
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