Wambua v Blue Kiki African Transport Limited (Appeal E226 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1228 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Unsigned fixed-term contracts don't protect Kenyan employers: this Mombasa employment appeal ruled the worker deserved notice pay because his contracts were never signed or accepted.
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 appellant was employed under accepted fixed-term contracts or as an unprotected verbal-contract employee
- 2.Whether the cessation of employment was lawful expiry of a fixed-term contract or unfair termination
- 3.Whether the appellant is entitled to notice pay, 12 months' compensation, underpayments, and leave pay
Key legal issues
#Nature of the employment relationship — fixed-term contract or verbal contract
Without the appellant's acceptance or signature on the filed contracts, he was an employee protected under Section 37 of the Employment Act
The respondent filed letters of appointment, but there was no evidence of the appellant's acceptance of their terms, save for the wage paid. Section 10(3) permits fixed-term contracts, but Section 9(4) requires the contract to be explained to an employee who cannot understand it. Acceptance of the letter of appointment was imperative; without endorsement its terms could not bind him.
Whether termination was unfair
Termination was unfair because the respondent, acting under the mistaken belief that the contract ended on 21 September 2023, undertook no due process
The appellant did not deny reporting late on 20 September 2023 and being confronted. Because the respondent believed the fixed term was expiring, it issued no notice and gave no reasons. Without an accepted written contract, the appellant was entitled to notice and reasons; failure to accord due process rendered the termination unfair, entitling him to notice pay.
Remedies
Notice pay of Ksh. 31,500 awarded; compensation, underpayment and leave pay claims refused
Notice pay was awarded at the last wage paid. Compensation was refused under Section 45(5) given the appellant's poor work record and warnings for lateness. The wage paid exceeded the minimum wage, and the consolidated wage included leave pay, defeating the underpayment and leave claims.
Legal principles established
#- An employer may issue a fixed-term contract, and upon its expiry is not required to issue notice or reasons for termination
- An employee under a verbal contract paid daily and engaged over periods beyond a day is protected under Section 37 of the Employment Act
- A letter of appointment must be accepted or endorsed by the employee for its terms to bind him
Court orders
#- 1.The judgment in Mombasa CMELRC No. E696 of 2023 is reviewed to the extent that the appellant is entitled to notice pay of Ksh. 31,500
- 2.Each party is to bear its own costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Magistrates' Court (ELRC), Mombasa
- Mombasa CMELRC No. 696 of 2023
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal from the trial magistrate's court (statutory appeal to the Employment and Labour Relations Court)
Relief refused
#12 months' compensation
Poor work record and habitual lateness; under Section 45(5) no compensation awardable
Underpayments for 3 years and 8 months
Wage paid exceeded the minimum wage
3 years' annual leave pay
The consolidated wage of Ksh. 31,500 factored in leave days
Costs
Each party is to bear its own 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.
Without the appellant's acceptance or signature on the filed contracts, he became an employee protected under Section 37 of the Employment Act.
Without a written contract that was accepted by the appellant before his employment was terminated, he was entitled to notice and the reasons for it.
Under the mistaken belief that the contract was ending on 21 September 2023, the respondent did not undertake any due process. This resulted in unfair termination of employment
Accordingly, the judgment in Mombasa CMELRC No. E696 of 2023 is reviewed to the extent that the appellant is entitled to notice pay of Ksh. 31, 500. Each party is to bear its costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The letter of appointment dated 29 October 2021 is described as ending on 21 October 2023, while the respondent's pleadings state the third contract ran from 29 October 2021 to 21 October 2022 and the court elsewhere refers to the contract ending on 21 September 2023
Conflicting daily wage figures: the claim describes Ksh.1,030 per day while the court's analysis states Ksh.1,050 per day
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wambua v Blue Kiki African Transport Limited (Appeal E226 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1228 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Mombasa ELRC Appeal (from CMELRC No. 696 of 2023). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1228/eng@2025-04-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.