Jared Onyango Agimba v Victory Farms Limited
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court dismissed a manager's unfair dismissal claim because his employer followed proper disciplinary steps and had valid reasons.
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 termination of the Claimant's employment was fair (procedurally and substantively)
- 2.Whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought
Key legal issues
#Procedural fairness of the termination
The Claimant was accorded procedural fairness: he was issued a notice to show cause, responded, attended a disciplinary hearing and his defence was considered
The court traced the disciplinary process: notice to show cause dated 27th August 2024, response, disciplinary hearing on 11th September 2024, consideration of the defence, then dismissal on 21st September 2024. The Claimant's failure to pursue his internal appeal was also noted against him.
Substantive justification for the dismissal
There was cause for the disciplinary process and a breach by the employee was evident, justifying termination
The court found the Claimant admitted an issue with the tiling of some property, and that on all material before the employer a breach was evident. The court did not require the employer to prove fraud to the criminal standard; it accepted the employer's material as sufficient.
Burden of proof under sections 43, 45 and 47 of the Employment Act
The Claimant failed to discharge the legal burden of showing the termination was unfair
The court held the Claimant had not surmounted the hurdles imposed by sections 43, 45 and 47 of the Employment Act, adopting the Respondent's submission that the Claimant bore the initial burden under section 47(5) and failed to displace it.
Legal principles established
#- An employee who has been accorded procedural fairness and against whom a valid reason exists cannot obtain remedies under sections 43, 45 and 47 of the Employment Act
Court orders
#- 1.The Claimant's suit is 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 (suit for unfair termination); no specific constitutional provision invoked
Relief refused
#Declaration that termination was unfair and unlawful
Claimant failed to surmount the legal hurdles under sections 43, 45 and 47 of the Employment Act
Reinstatement without loss of benefits
Termination found fair; no remedy available
Kshs. 190,000/- pay in lieu of notice
Termination lawful; summary dismissal excludes notice entitlement
Kshs. 513,000/- annual bonus for 2024
Not granted; suit dismissed in its entirety
Kshs. 2,280,000/- compensation for unfair termination
Termination found procedurally and substantively fair
Kshs. 95,000/- for 15 days' unpaid leave
Not granted; suit dismissed in its entirety
Costs of the suit
Court declined to award costs to either party
Costs
No order as to costs - each party to bear their own costs ("The Claimant’s suit is dismissed albeit with no order as to costs. It is so ordered.")
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.
In my considered view, the Claimant was accorded procedural fairness prior to termination.
It was evident there was a breach by the employee resulting in termination upon consideration of all material before the employer.
The Claimant’s suit is dismissed albeit with no order as to costs. It is so ordered.
Issues in the judgment
#Judgment delivery date appears to be a typographical error, one year after filing
Judgment contradicts Claimant's unchallenged testimony that he lodged an appeal
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jared Onyango Agimba v Victory Farms Limited", Case Analysis (2026). Cause No. E029 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2460/eng@2026-09-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.