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

Kirui v Kanika International Limited (Cause E001 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 478 (KLR) (6 March 2024) (Judgment)

[2024] KEELRC 478 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
478
Citation
[2024] KEELRC 478 (KLR)
Decided
6 March 2024
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

TypeConstructive DismissalPostureAppeal from the original trialCoramCN BAARI, D.K.N Marete
The Court finds in favor of the Claimant and awards her salary in lieu of leave, unpaid salaries, compensation for constructive termination, general damages for sexual harassment, and costs of the suit.

Facts

The Claimant, Vivian Kirui, was employed as a Clinician by the Respondent, Kanika International Limited, on a two-year contract. She alleged that she was constructively dismissed due to non-payment of salary, piecemeal payments, and failure to be included in the payroll, which she claimed was discriminatory.

Issues

  • Whether the Claimant was constructively dismissed.
  • Whether the Claimant deserves the reliefs sought.

Reasoning

The Court found that the Respondent's non-payment of salary and failure to include the Claimant in the payroll constituted acts that substantially changed essential terms of the contract, leading to constructive dismissal.

Outcome

In favor of the Claimant

Orders

  • Salary in lieu of leave at Kshs 125,000/=
  • Unpaid salaries at Kshs. 264,000/=
  • 5 months’ salary as compensation for constructive termination at Kshs 625,000/=
  • General damages for sexual harassment Kshs. 500,000/=
  • Costs of the suit and interest until payment in full.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (1)
  • Coca-Cola East & Central Africa Limited v Maria Kagai Lugaga (2015) eKLR
⚠ 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