Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in the judgment· [2024] KEELRC 2179 (KLR)

Kago v Inades Formation Kenya (Cause E953 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 2179 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
6 September 2024
5,214 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~21 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court confirmed that when a fixed-term contract expires after proper notice of non-renewal, that is not unfair termination and no compensation is owed.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, engaged as Chief Administration and Finance on 12th November 2018, served successive fixed-term contracts, the last running from 1st January 2021 to 31st July 2021. On 30th April 2021 she received notice that the contract would not be renewed, citing poor performance. She sued seeking a declaration of unfair termination, 12 months' salary as compensation, service pay and accrued leave pay, and alleged discrimination because peers allegedly received three-year extensions while she received only seven months. The Respondent maintained the contract lapsed by effluxion of time after due notice of non-renewal, that renewal was discretionary and dependent on performance and donor funds, and that service pay was inapplicable because it maintained a pension scheme and remitted NSSF dues. The court framed three issues: unfair termination versus effluxion of time, discrimination, and entitlement to reliefs. Applying authorities on fixed-term contracts, it held that fixed-term contracts carry no legitimate expectation of renewal and that non-renewal is not unfair termination; the Claimant served her full term, received three months' notice of non-renewal and was paid her final dues including leave pay. The discrimination claim failed for want of evidence, as the Claimant called no witness to prove peers got longer contracts and never complained when issued the shorter contract. The entire claim was dismissed with costs to the Respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Claimant was unfairly terminated or her contract ended by effluxion of time

Holding

The contract ended by effluxion of time; there was no termination and no legitimate expectation of renewal

Reasoning

The Claimant's contracts were fixed-term, the last running from 1st January 2021 to 31st July 2021, renewable at the employer's option depending on donor funds and performance. She was notified on 30th April 2021 that the contract would not be renewed, served the full term to 31st July 2021 and was paid her final dues. Following the authorities on fixed-term contracts, no claim for unfair termination could be maintained.

p. 9
02

Whether the Claimant was discriminated against

Holding

The discrimination claim failed for lack of proof

Reasoning

The Claimant alleged she alone got a 7-month extension while peers got three years, but called no witness to prove peers received longer contracts and never complained when issued with the 7-month contract, only after serving the full term. Evidence showed she skipped trainings relevant to her performance. She therefore did not discharge the burden of proving differential treatment on a prohibited ground.

p. 10
03

Whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought

Holding

No reliefs were due; the entire claim was dismissed with costs

Reasoning

Having found no unfair termination and no discrimination, and having found that the Claimant served her full term and was paid her final dues including leave pay, the court found nothing payable. The claim for service pay was also undermined by the employer's pension and NSSF contributions, and the leave claim had been abandoned in cross-examination.

p. 10

Legal principles established

#
  • Fixed-term contracts expire by effluxion of time and carry no legitimate expectation of renewal; non-renewal does not amount to unfair termination
  • Where a fixed-term contract lapses by effluxion of time, the employer is not obliged to give grounds for termination so long as it gave due notice of non-renewal
  • An allegation of discrimination must be proved on a balance of probabilities with evidence of differential treatment of persons in similar positions

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The claim in its entirety is dismissed with costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 10(3)(c)
  • Employment ActSection 35
  • Employment ActSections 41, 43, 45, 47(5), 49(1)(c)
  • Evidence ActSections 106B(1), (2) and (4)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 50
  • Fair Administrative Actions ActNot specified

Cases cited (15)

  • Abraham Gumba v Kenya Medical Supplies Authority
    (2014) eKLR
  • Hesbon Ngaruiya Waigi vs Equitorial Commercial Bank Limited
    Industrial court at Nairobi cause No 60 of 2013
  • Water Ogal Anuro v Teachers Service Commission
    (2013) eKLR
  • Mary Chemweno Kiptui vs Kenya Pipeline Company Limited
    (2014) eKLR
  • Rajab Barasa & 4 others v Kenya Meat Commission
    (2021) eKLR
  • Margaret A Ochieng v National Water Conservation & Pipeline Corporation
    (2014) eKLR
  • Samson Gwer & 5 Others v Kenya Medical Research Institute & 3 others
    (2020) eKLR
  • Transparency International Kenya v Teresa Carlo Omondi
    Civil Appeal No. 18 of 2018 [2023] eKLR
  • Kennedy Nyanguncha Omanga v Bob Morgan Services Limited
    (2013) eKLR
  • Esther Muthoni Wachira v Vice Chancellor University of Nairobi & University of Nairobi
    [2022] eKLR
  • Registered Trustees Of The Presbyterian Church Of East Africa & Another Versus Ruth Gathoni Ngotho Kariuki
    2017 EKLR
  • East Africa Sea Food Limited v Mwazito
    (Appeal E013 of 2020) [2023] KEELRC 1257 (KLR) (20 April 2023)
  • Gichuru v Package Insurance Brokers Ltd
    (Petition 36 of 2019) [2021] KESC 12 (KLR) (22 October 2021)
  • Francis Njeru Kariuki v Crown Paints Kenya Limited
    [2022] eKLR
  • Barclays Bank of Kenya Ltd & another v Gladys Muthoni & 20 others
    [2018] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court original jurisdiction under the Employment Act and the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (not expressly cited in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kago v Inades Formation Kenya (Cause E953 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 2179 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/2179/eng@2024-09-06

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.