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

Githinji v Topcare Lands Investment Limited (Cause E844 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2295 (KLR) (31 July 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KEELRC 2295 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2295
Citation
[2025] KEELRC 2295 (KLR)
Decided
31 July 2025
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 DisputePostureAppeal from the original trialCoramNDOLO
There was an employment relationship between the parties, and the Claimant has proved a case of unlawful termination of employment.

Facts

The Claimant, Lydia Githinji, was employed by the Respondent, Topcare Lands Investment Limited, as a General Manager on January 3, 2022, earning Kshs. 200,000 per month. She was suspended indefinitely without pay and without cause on February 6, 2022. The Claimant claimed unlawful termination and sought compensation.

Issues

  • Whether there was an employment relationship between the parties
  • Whether the Claimant has proved a case of unlawful termination of employment
  • Whether the Claimant is entitled to the remedies sought

Reasoning

The Claimant was paid a salary of Kshs. 200,000 for January 2022, and the Respondent did not provide evidence that this was for a probationary appointment. The Respondent did not subject the Claimant to a performance review or capability hearing.

Outcome

The Claimant was awarded three (3) months' salary in compensation.

Remedies

  • Compensation for three (3) months' salary

Authorities cited

Cases cited (4)
  • Obonyo v Britam Life Assurance Co (K) Ltd
  • Daniel Otieno Migore v South Nyanza Sugar Co. Ltd
  • KSRITAWU v Stanley Kinyanjui
  • Jane Samba Mkala v Ol Tukai Lodge Limited
⚠ 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