Masawa v Magdak Maternity Hospital Limited (Cause E014 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 296 (KLR)
The bottom line
#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 proved unfair termination of employment despite the claim being undefended
- 2.Whether the claimant proved the claim for unpaid salary of Kshs 135,000/-
Key legal issues
#Whether an undefended claim is automatically proved
No - the claimant must still plead and prove the claim on a balance of probabilities
The court noted the claim was fraught with paucity of information: the alleged salary figures were inconsistent (Kshs 135,000/- claimed vs Kshs 30,000/- per month in the demand letter vs Kshs 25,000/- monthly salary), there was no bank statement or payment slip, the demand letter was neither stamped received nor accompanied by a certificate of posting, and no demand for salary preceded the advocates' letter of 26th October 2023. Uncontroverted testimony therefore could not establish the claim.
Compliance with the complaint procedure under section 47 of the Employment Act
The claimant's complaint to the Labour Office appeared to have been lodged after the 3-month limitation period and was unsupported by documentation
The court observed that under section 47 of the Employment Act an employee must lodge a complaint with the Labour Office within 3 months of the alleged unfair termination. The claimant, orally terminated in June 2023, apparently complained only in September 2023, and presented no documentation supporting the allegations of non-payment of salary to the Labour Officer.
Legal principles established
#- A claim proceeding undefended must still be proved; uncontroverted evidence does not relieve the claimant of the burden of proof
Court orders
#- 1.The claim, though undefended, was found unproved and dismissed
- 2.No order as to costs
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 (sections 45, 47 and 49 cited) and Articles 41 and 47 of the Constitution as invoked by the claimant
Relief refused
#Reinstatement
The entire claim was found unproved for failure to plead and prove the case
Damages for unlawful termination (Kshs 1,000,000/- or 12 months' salary)
Claim unproved; the claim was fraught with paucity of information and uncontroverted evidence alone did not establish the claim
Unpaid salary of Kshs 135,000/-
The sum was not corroborated by any documentation; it did not correspond to months of salary at the alleged rate and no bank statements or payment slips were produced
Costs
No order as to costs
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.
As the Claimant failed to properly plead and prove his case, the Court finds that the claim, though undefended, to have been unproved and is dismissed with no order as to costs.
It is so ordered.
There is no bank statement or payment slip indicating the salary earned per month further compounding the Claimant's woes.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment does not state the case number or neutral citation of the claim
Inconsistency within the judgment as to the salary figures relied on by the claimant
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Masawa v Magdak Maternity Hospital Limited (Cause E014 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 296 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Memorandum of Claim filed 23rd February 2024 (number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/296/eng@2025-02-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.