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

Kariuki v Tangaza University College & another (Cause E375 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2017 (KLR) (25 June 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KEELRC 2017 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2017
Citation
[2025] KEELRC 2017 (KLR)
Decided
25 June 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeEmployment DisputePostureAppeal from a previous decisionCoramDKN MARETE
Holding

The Court held that the termination of the Claimant's employment was not wrongful, unfair, or unlawful, and that the Claimant is not entitled to the relief sought.

Facts

The Claimant, David Kimenju Kariuki, was employed by the 1st Respondent, Tangaza University College, as a Financial Accountant for three years, with renewals and promotions. The contract was renewed in 2013, 2016, and 2019, and the Claimant was promoted to Chief Accountant and later to Strategic Planning Manager. On 26th February 2022, the 2nd Respondent, Apollinaire Chihebe Chishugi, notified the Claimant that his contract would not be renewed upon expiry.

Issues

  1. Whether there was a termination of the employment of the Claimant by the Respondent
  2. Whether the termination, if at all, was wrongful, unfair and unlawful
  3. Whether the Claimant is entitled to the relief sought
  4. Who bears the costs of this cause

Reasoning

The Court found that the contract lapsed on 22nd March, 2022, and the Respondent provided one month's notice of non-renewal. The Claimant's reliance on Sections 41 and 45 of the Employment Act, 2007, and the doctrine of legitimate expectation was not applicable.

Outcome

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act, 2007
Cases cited (2)
  • Registered Trustees PCEA v Ruth Gathoni [2017] eKLR
  • Oshwal Academy v Indu Vishwanath [2015] KECA 120 (KLR)
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case