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

Musyoka t/a Jana Pestcon v Mnyika (Appeal E186 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 376 (KLR) (13 February 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KEELRC 376 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
376
Citation
[2025] KEELRC 376 (KLR)
Decided
13 February 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

TypeAppealPostureFirst appeal from the judgment of Hon. G SogomoCoramM MBARŨ, J
The appeal is without merit and should be dismissed with costs.

Facts

The respondent, a driver, allowed an unauthorized driver to drive his vehicle, leading to an accident. The respondent was arrested and later released on bail. He did not resume work until 15 December 2022, when he refused to collect a notice to show cause for absenteeism.

Issues

  • Whether the respondent's refusal to attend work was gross misconduct.
  • Whether the employer's decision to allow the claim to take its course was an abdication of a legal duty.
  • Whether the employer's decision to sign an agreement accepting liability for damages was unfair and unlawful.

Reasoning

The court found that the respondent's refusal to attend work was gross misconduct and that the employer's decision to allow the claim to take its course was an abdication of a legal duty. The court also found that the employer's decision to sign an agreement accepting liability for damages was unfair and unlawful.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (4)
  • Employment Act
  • Section 41 of the Employment Act
  • Section 44(4) (a) of the Employment Act
  • Section 47(5) of the Employment Act
Cases cited (2)
  • Peter Otabong Ekisa v County Government of Busia
  • Ayub Kombe Ziro v Umoja Rubber Products 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