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

Karambu v Chandaria Industries Ltd (Cause E094 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 3000 (KLR) (22 November 2023) (Judgment)

[2023] KEELRC 3000 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
3000
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 3000 (KLR)
Decided
22 November 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeUnfair TerminationPostureClaimant vs RespondentCoramJK GAKERI, Ndolo
Holding

The court found that the termination was unfair due to procedural violations and lack of evidence supporting the claimant's misconduct.

Facts

Claimant was employed as a Sales-Manager and was terminated on January 6, 2021. The claimant alleged she was not given sufficient time to respond to the allegations and the disciplinary process was rushed. She claimed she was not intoxicated and had a tracking device on her vehicle.

Issues

  1. Whether termination of the claimant’s employment was unfair.
  2. Whether the respondent had a valid and fair reason for the termination.

Reasoning

The court determined that the termination was unfair because the claimant was not given sufficient time to respond to the allegations and the disciplinary process was rushed. Additionally, the court found that the evidence supporting the claimant's misconduct was lacking.

Outcome

Unfair termination

Remedies

  • 12 months compensation for unfair termination Kshs 2,437,875.00.
  • One month’s salary in lieu of notice Kshs 203,156.25.
  • January salary Kshs 203,156.25.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act, 2007
Cases cited (2)
  • Walter Ogal Anuro v Teachers Service Commission (2013) eKLR
  • Naima Khamis v Oxford University Press (EA) Ltd (2017) eKLR
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 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case