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

Bhundia v Chandarana Supermarket Ltd & another (Cause E279 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 726 (KLR) (21 March 2023) (Judgment)

[2023] KEELRC 726 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
726
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 726 (KLR)
Decided
21 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

TypeLabor DisputePostureAppeal from the original trialCoramJK GAKERI, Lenaola, Nderi, Ndolo, Radido
The court found that the Claimant had a cause of action and jurisdiction to hear the case. The court also found that the termination was not unfair and that the Claimant was not constructively dismissed.

Facts

The Claimant, Bhundia, was employed by Chandarana Supermarket Ltd and Chandarana Food Plus as a Manager. He claimed terminal dues due to constructive dismissal. He alleged that he was on duty on March 15, 2020, and found Kshs.295,595 missing from the safe. The CCTV footage was not available, and the Claimant was demoted.

Issues

  • Whether the Claimant has a cause of action against the Respondent.
  • Whether the Claimant was constructively dismissed by the Respondent.
  • Whether termination of the Claimant’s employment was unfair.
  • Whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought.

Reasoning

The court declared Section 45(3) of the Employment Act, 2007 unconstitutional and inapplicable. The court held that the termination was not substantively unjustified and procedurally fair. The court also found that the Claimant did not provide evidence of a repudiatory breach by the Respondent.

Outcome

The court dismissed the claim.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Employment Act, 2007
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010
Cases cited (2)
  • Coca Cola East & Central Africa v Maria Kagai Ligaga (2015) eKLR
  • Walter Ogal Anuro v Teachers Service Commission
⚠ 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