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

Mwinamo v Shoppers Sacco Society Ltd (Cause 727 of 2018) [2025] KEELRC 2962 (KLR) (30 October 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KEELRC 2962 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2962
Citation
[2025] KEELRC 2962 (KLR)
Decided
30 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

TypeUnfair Termination of EmploymentPostureAppeal from an original trialCoramRADIDO
The Court finds and declares that the Respondent constructively dismissed the Claimant and breached the contract. The Claimant is awarded compensation, pay in lieu of notice, withheld salary, and a Certificate of Service.

Facts

The Claimant, Sharon Mwinamo, was a Human Resource and Development Manager at Shoppers Sacco Society Ltd. She was suspended for 14 days on half-pay and later resigned, citing a hostile work environment. The Respondent, Shoppers Sacco Society Ltd, offered terminal dues but withheld 1 month's salary and claimed over-recovery of loans.

Issues

  • Constructive dismissal
  • Compensation
  • Pay in lieu of notice
  • Withheld salary
  • Breach of contract
  • Loan recovery
  • Violation of rights to dignity and privacy

Reasoning

The Court found that the Respondent created a hostile work environment, warranting the Claimant to resign and assert constructive dismissal. The withheld salary and loan recovery claims were also addressed.

Outcome

The Claimant is awarded Kshs 577,500 in total.

Orders

  • Award of compensation
  • Award of pay in lieu of notice
  • Award of withheld salary
  • Order for a Certificate of Service

Remedies

  • Compensation
  • Pay in lieu of notice
  • Withheld salary
  • Certificate of Service

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act, 2007
⚠ 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