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

Oaga v G4S Kenya Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Claim E015 of 2021) [2022] KEELRC 4097 (KLR) (28 September 2022) (Judgment)

[2022] KEELRC 4097 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
4097
Citation
[2022] KEELRC 4097 (KLR)
Decided
28 September 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 and Labour Relations ClaimPostureClaimant v RespondentCoramDKN MARETE
The court finds the termination of employment unlawful and grants the claimant relief including salary in lieu of notice, compensation for unlawful termination, service gratuity, and costs.

Facts

Claimant was employed as a security guard from January 2, 1999, and was dismissed on October 15, 2018, for allegedly sleeping on duty. He claimed unlawful suspension and termination.

Issues

  • Unlawful and wrongful suspension
  • Unlawful and wrongful termination of employment

Reasoning

The court found the termination was not justified due to the claimant's long service and the isolated nature of the incident.

Outcome

Claimant wins

Orders

  • One (1) months salary in lieu of notice
  • Ten (10) months salary as compensation for unlawful termination
  • Service gratuity for 19 years
  • 15 days worked up to 15th October, 2018
  • Costs of the claim met by the respondent

Remedies

  • Salary in lieu of notice
  • Compensation for unlawful termination
  • Service gratuity
  • Back pay
  • Costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Employment Act 2007
  • Labour Relations 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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case