Jecinta Nyambura Kamau v Laboratory and Allied Limited [2021] KEELRC 927 (KLR)

The claimant, having served past probation, was entitled to procedural fairness under Section 41 and a valid reason under Sections 43 and 45 of the Employment Act. The letter of termination cited only loss of confidence, with no prior complaint against her and no hearing. In an undefended suit, the claimant's uncontroverted evidence proved these breaches on a balance of probabilities, warranting a declaration and compensation.

In exercising the discretion under Section 49, the court relied on Mary Chemweno Kiptui v Kenya Pipeline and Antony Maina Ruriga v Hilton Hotel Nairobi, considering the one year served, the total denial of a hearing, the claimant's lack of contribution to the termination, her loss of career progression and livelihood, and the absence of notice or compensation.

The claimant's uncontroverted evidence, adduced at formal proof after the respondent failed to enter a defence despite service, established that she worked nine hours daily instead of eight without overtime pay. The court found this proved on a balance of probabilities and awarded the computed sum.

The court held that an employment claim founded on the Employment Act need not be elevated to a constitutional petition. While termination infringed statutory protections, the claimant did not demonstrate that the contractual breach independently violated Articles 27, 28, 41 and 47 of the Constitution, so that head of relief failed for want of proof.