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

Riley Falcon Security Services v Ngisa (Appeal E051 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2934 (KLR) (29 October 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KEELRC 2934 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2934
Citation
[2025] KEELRC 2934 (KLR)
Decided
29 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

TypeAppealPostureAppeal from a judgment and decree of Hon Robert Mobisa Oanda (SPM) in Winam SPMCELRC No. E051 of 2022CoramNZIOKI WA MAKAU
The appeal is partially successful, with the notice pay reversed, and the parties to bear their own costs.

Facts

The Respondent, Erick Ngisa, sued the Appellant, Riley Falcon Security Services, alleging unfair termination of employment due to the loss of a site key. He claimed he had handed the key over to a colleague, James Ombati, but was held responsible for its loss. He also alleged that he was not given the opportunity to cross-examine Ombati or receive his witness statement, and that the disciplinary process was rushed.

Issues

  • Fairness of the termination
  • Compensation for unfair termination
  • Notice pay
  • Overtime pay
  • Gratuity
  • Service certificate
  • Costs

Reasoning

The court found the termination to be procedurally fair but improperly decided the amount of notice pay. The court reversed the notice pay award and upheld the rest of the judgment.

Outcome

Appeal partially successful

Orders

  • Reversal of the notice pay award

Remedies

  • Reversal of the notice pay award
  • Costs to be borne by the parties
⚠ 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