Njuguna v Torrent East Africa Limited (Cause E648 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 853 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court awarded six months' salary to an employee declared redundant without proper notice or fair selection criteria.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the termination on account of redundancy was fair and procedural
The termination was unfair because no redundancy notice was served on the Claimant or the labour officer as required by Section 40(1)(a) and (b), and no selection criteria were demonstrated
The Court found that no notice of redundancy was served on a trade union, the Claimant personally, or the area labour officer; only the termination letter itself was delivered. The Respondent also failed to demonstrate the criteria used to select the Claimant, and did not rebut evidence that more junior employees whom the Claimant had trained remained in employment, and that two new employees were later engaged to perform his duties. Failure to comply with the mandatory statutory procedure rendered the process unprocedural and the termination unfair.
What compensation is due for unfair termination
Six months' gross salary (Kshs.1,350,666/=) awarded, subject to statutory deductions, with interest and costs
Having found unfair termination, the Court exercised discretion under Section 49 to award six months' salary, considering the length of service (5 years), the abrupt manner of termination, and that the Claimant did not contribute to his termination. The admitted gross salary of Kshs.225,111/= formed the basis of the computation. The award was made subject to statutory deductions under Section 49(2), with interest from judgment and costs to the Claimant.
Whether the claims for salary arrears and general damages were proved
Both claims declined
The Claimant admitted in cross-examination that the disputed deductions were pension contributions already being pursued with the Pension Manager, and confirmed receipt of terminal dues. The general damages claim failed for want of medical or expert evidence of pain, suffering and emotional distress, and because the Claimant did not utilise the medical cover and psychosocial support offered by the Respondent up to 17th April 2023.
Legal principles established
#- An employer must strictly comply with the mandatory procedure in Section 40(1) of the Employment Act, including prior notice of redundancy to the employee and the labour officer and a fair selection criteria, failing which the termination is unfair
- The burden of proving compliance with the selection criteria under Section 40(1)(c) of the Employment Act lies on the employer
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the Claimant against the Respondent for Kshs.1,350,666/= being compensation for unfair termination of employment
- 2.The awarded sum shall be subject to statutory deductions applicable at the time of termination pursuant to Section 49(2) of the Employment Act
- 3.Interest on the awarded sum at court rates from the date of judgment
- 4.Costs of the suit to the Claimant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original employment and labour relations jurisdiction (Employment Act 2007; claim for unfair termination)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Njuguna v Torrent East Africa Limited (Cause E648 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 853 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (Memorandum of Claim dated 2nd February 2023). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/853/eng@2025-03-14
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.