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

Wanagia v Security Group Kenya (Cause 2280 of 2015) [2022] KEELRC 1665 (KLR) (12 May 2022) (Judgment)

[2022] KEELRC 1665 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
1665
Citation
[2022] KEELRC 1665 (KLR)
Decided
12 May 2022
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 DisputePostureAppeal from an original trial decisionCoramOCHARO
The Court finds that the separation occurred on 16th September 2015, not 15th July 2015 as initially claimed by the Claimant. The termination was not fair.

Facts

The Claimant, Anzeliimo Ekeya Wanagia, was employed as a security guard by the Respondent, Security Group Kenya, from April 1999 to 15th July 2015. On 15th July 2015, the Claimant was assigned duties at Simba Complex, where a government operation was conducted. The Claimant was later terminated on 16th September 2015.

Issues

  • How the separation in employment between the Claimant and the Respondent occurred
  • Whether the termination was fair
  • Whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought
  • Who should bear the costs of this suit

Reasoning

The Court accepted the Claimant's position that he was told to be off duty on 16th September 2015 and was never called back. The Court held that the termination was not fair.

Outcome

The Court dismissed the Claimant's case and ordered the Respondent to bear the costs of the suit.

Orders

  • Dismissal of the Claimant's case
  • Order for the Respondent to bear the costs of the suit

Authorities cited

Cases cited (1)
  • Schmahm vs. Concept Communications Natal [pty] Limited [1997] 8 BhLR logz[CC]
⚠ 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