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

Makokha v Deloitte Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 91 of 2019) [2023] KEELRC 723 (KLR) (23 March 2023) (Judgment)

[2023] KEELRC 723 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
723
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 723 (KLR)
Decided
23 March 2023
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 RelationsPostureClaim against Respondent for unlawful redundancyCoramBOM MANANI
The redundancy process was lawful, and the Claimant's employment was lawfully terminated.

Facts

Claimant Bridgid Makokha was a Regional Security Manager for Respondent Deloitte Limited from November 27, 2014. She was served with a redundancy notice on January 25, 2019, which was later nullified by the court. The parties dispute whether the redundancy process was lawful.

Issues

  • Whether the redundancy process was lawful
  • Whether the Claimant's employment was lawfully terminated

Reasoning

The court held that redundancy is a lawful mechanism for closing an employment relationship as long as it is processed in accordance with the applicable law. The court found that the Respondent followed the prescribed procedure for declaring redundancy.

Outcome

Claim dismissed

Authorities cited

Cases cited (2)
  • Aviation and Allied Workers Union v Kenya Airways Limited & 3 others (2012) eKLR
  • Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers v Nerix Pharma Limited (ELRC Cause No E 532 of 2021)
⚠ 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 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case