Munyi v S.A Manyatta Secondary School (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E010 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 228 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ordered a school board to pay a former secretary Kshs.164,577 for underpayment and unpaid house allowance, but rejected her gratuity claim.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.whether the claimant is entitled to payment of the dues sought in her suit
Key legal issues
#Entitlement to house allowance
The claimant was entitled to house allowance since she was neither housed nor paid any allowance; awarded 15% of the minimum basic salary for 3 years (Kshs.75,466.62)
RW1 admitted the claimant was neither housed nor paid house allowance. Section 31 of the Employment Act imposes a mandatory duty on employers to provide reasonable housing or a sufficient allowance. The claimant's limited claim of 3 years at 15% of the basic salary was computed using the 2018 Wage Order minimum of Kshs.13,975.30, which the court adopted as binding.
Entitlement to service gratuity
Claim for gratuity declined as it was not anchored in the contract of employment and was not substantiated
Gratuity is a contractual entitlement; the claimant's appointment letter made no provision for it. The circulars she relied on did not apply to School Board employees, and none of her exhibits concerned gratuity for Board employees. The claim was therefore unsubstantiated and declined.
Underpayment of salary
The claimant was underpaid by Kshs.2,475.30 per month against the 2018 Wage Order minimum; awarded Kshs.89,110.80 for 3 years
There was no dispute that the claimant earned Kshs.11,500 while the 2018 Wage Order prescribed a minimum of Kshs.13,975.30. Relying on sections 3, 7 and 26 of the Employment Act and section 48(1) of the Labour Institutions Act, the court held minimum wages constitute terms of the contract, and awarded the 3-year shortfall limited to the period claimed.
Legal principles established
#- No employer, including a School Board of Management, may employ any person under a contract of service below the minimum terms and conditions prescribed by the Employment Act, the Labour Institutions Act and the Wages Order
- A right to gratuity must be anchored in the contract of employment as opposed to service pay which is anchored on section 35 (5) of the Employment Act
- Section 31 of the Employment Act mandatorily requires an employer to provide reasonable housing or pay sufficient house allowance
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the claimant against the respondent: salary underpayment of Kshs.89,110.80 and house allowance of Kshs.75,466.62, totalling Kshs.164,577.42
- 2.Costs awarded to the claimant at the Lower court rates because of the quantum of damages awarded
- 3.The award is subject to statutory deductions
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act and related labour statutes
Relief refused
#Service gratuity of Kshs.133,170 for 11.58 years of service
The right to gratuity must be anchored in the contract of employment; the claimant's letter of appointment did not provide for gratuity and no exhibit supported her claim based on Government circulars
Costs
The claimant is awarded costs at the Lower court rates because of the quantum of damages awarded.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
No employer in Kenya, including a School Board of Management has the liberty of employing any person under a contract of service below the minimum terms and conditions prescribed under the said statutes.
I now enter judgment for the claimant against the respondent in the following terms
The claimant is also awarded costs at the Lower court rates because of the quantum of damages awarded. The award is subject to statutory deductions.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Munyi v S.A Manyatta Secondary School (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E010 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 228 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Statement of claim dated 12th March 2024 (ELRC, Nyeri). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/228/eng@2025-02-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.