Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedStatement of Claim dated 27th July 2023 (number not stated in judgment)· [2025] KEELRC 2176 (KLR)

Mutisya v Shona Epz Limited (Cause E594 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2176 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
24 July 2025
LNLINNET NDOLO
2,077 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled that firing an employee without stating a reason or giving a hearing is unfair, awarding her over Kshs. 1.8 million.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant was employed by the Respondent on 1st February 2018 as Factory Manager on a monthly salary that rose to Kshs. 205,432. By a letter dated 2nd May 2023 signed by Director Isaac Maluki, the Respondent terminated her employment on 30 days' notice, stating only that it was 'unable to continue engaging' her, and tabulating dues of Kshs. 2,437,938 comprising 8 months' pending salary, workers advances refund, severance pay and leave pay. The dues were not paid. The Claimant sued for a declaration of wrongful and unfair dismissal, the tabulated dues, and 12 months' salary in compensation. The Respondent admitted the employment but alleged misconduct, poor performance, absenteeism, financial mismanagement and operational reasons of declining revenue, and alternatively asserted a mutual separation agreement. The Respondent's counsel ceased acting; the matter proceeded without its appearance and judgment was based on the pleadings, the Claimant's testimony and her submissions. The court framed two issues: the lawfulness and fairness of the termination, and entitlement to remedies. Relying on Sections 43, 45 and 41 of the Employment Act and the Anuro decision, the court held the termination substantively and procedurally unfair: the letter communicated no valid reason and no disciplinary process or hearing preceded it. Five months' salary in compensation was awarded, plus severance pay, leave pay and workers advances refund, with interest at court rates from judgment and costs to the Claimant. Notably, the 8 months' pending salary of Kshs. 1,643,456, though described as admitted and payable, does not appear in the final decree - an apparent internal inconsistency.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the termination of the Claimant's employment was lawful and fair

Holding

Termination was substantively and procedurally unfair because the termination letter did not communicate any valid reason and no disciplinary process was followed

Reasoning

The Respondent pleaded misconduct, poor performance and operational reasons in its Response, but the termination letter of 2nd May 2023 mentioned none of these allegations, merely stating an inability to continue engaging the Claimant. Under Sections 43, 45 and 41 of the Employment Act the employer must prove a valid reason and follow fair procedure including a hearing. No reason was communicated and no hearing was afforded, so both substantive and procedural fairness failed.

p. 5
02

Whether the Claimant is entitled to the remedies sought

Holding

Partially - 5 months' salary compensation plus admitted dues of severance pay, leave pay and workers advances refund awarded

Reasoning

Compensation of five months' salary was awarded having regard to the Claimant's length of service, her non-contribution to the termination, and the Respondent's conduct in failing to give her a hearing and withholding terminal dues. The claims for 8 months' unpaid dues, severance pay, leave pay and workers advances refund were admitted and payable, though the final decree itemised severance, leave pay and workers advances refund only.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • Every termination of employment must be supported by a valid reason, which the employer must prove, failing which the termination is unfair
  • For a termination to pass the fairness test, both substantive and procedural fairness must be established

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Judgment for the Claimant of Kshs. 1,027,160 being 5 months' salary in compensation
  2. 2.Kshs. 512,500 severance pay for 5 years
  3. 3.Kshs. 205,432 leave pay
  4. 4.Kshs. 76,550 workers advances refund (total Kshs. 1,821,642)
  5. 5.Interest at court rates from the date of judgment until payment in full
  6. 6.Costs of the case to the Claimant
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment relationship evidenced by employment contract dated 1st February 2018 (statutory provision not expressly cited)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mutisya v Shona Epz Limited (Cause E594 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2176 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Statement of Claim dated 27th July 2023 (number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2176/eng@2025-07-24

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