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

Sukari Industries Limited & 3 others v Ongoro & 3 others (Cause E067 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2872 (KLR) (23 October 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KEELRC 2872 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2872
Citation
[2025] KEELRC 2872 (KLR)
Decided
23 October 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 an earlier ruling dismissing an application for injunctive reliefCoramJK GAKERI
The court dismissed the application for injunctive relief due to lack of proof and the respondents' counter-claims were not considered as the claimants did not file the necessary documents in time.

Facts

The claimants alleged that the respondents instigated an unprotected strike on August 19, 2024, but provided no verifiable evidence. The respondents filed counter-claims and a response on February 11, 2025.

Issues

  • Whether the respondents were employees of the 1st claimant
  • Whether there was a strike or go-slow on August 19, 2024
  • Whether the 1st, 3rd, and 4th respondents' employment was terminated unfairly
  • Whether the claimants are entitled to the reliefs sought
  • Whether the 3rd and 4th respondents' counter-claims are merited

Reasoning

The court found that the claimants did not provide verifiable evidence for their allegations and the respondents' counter-claims were not properly filed in time.

Outcome

The appeal was dismissed.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act
⚠ 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