Ng’ang’a v Safigen Kenya Limited (Cause 30 of 2019) [2023] KEELRC 1777 (KLR) (14 July 2023) (Judgment)
- Court
- Employment & Labour Relations Court
- Case number
- 1777
- Citation
- [2023] KEELRC 1777 (KLR)
- Decided
- 14 July 2023
Summary at a glance
TypeEmployment DisputePostureAppeal from the original trialCoramSTELLA RUTTO
The claimant's termination was deemed unfair and the claim is dismissed with each party bearing their own costs.
Facts
The claimant, Kennedy Waveru Ng’anga, worked as a cofounder for Safigen Kenya Limited from September 21, 2017. He built prototypes and worked with the company until August 31, 2018, when he was summarily dismissed.
Issues
- Whether the respondent had a fair and valid reason to terminate the claimant's employment.
- Whether the claimant was accorded procedural fairness prior to termination.
- Whether the Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the dispute regarding the vesting of shares.
- Whether the claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought.
Reasoning
The respondent failed to prove a valid and fair reason for terminating the claimant's employment, and the claimant was not accorded procedural fairness.
Outcome
The claim is dismissed with each party bearing their own costs.
Orders
- Interim orders compelling the respondent to produce transcripts of email communication and Slack transcripts.
- A declaration that the claimant's employment with the respondent was terminated wrongfully and unfairly.
- A declaration that the respondent cannot deny the claimant the right to use, adopt and develop his technology and technological ideas.
- A declaration that the respondent buys out the claimant from the company commensurate to the time spent in setting up the company and loss of opportunity to grow and develop the company.
- A declaration that the shares, both vested and unvested be allocated to the claimant.
Authorities cited
⚠ 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.
Loading judgment…