Joseph v Wonder Feeds Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E256 of 2023) [2026] KEMC 398 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nakuru court ruled that when a fixed-term work contract simply expires, that is not unfair termination, and workers must prove overtime or underpayment claims with records.
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's employment was permanent or based on fixed-term contracts.
- 2.Whether the Respondent unlawfully terminated the claimant's employment and whether the contract came to an end upon expiry of the agreed term.
- 3.Whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought.
Key legal issues
#Nature of employment: permanent or fixed-term
Claimant was employed under successive fixed-term contracts, not permanent terms.
Section 10 of the Employment Act requires written terms. Written contracts with definite commencement and expiry dates were executed and never impugned for coercion, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake. Fixed-term contracts are lawful, and courts give effect to agreements freely entered. Sanctity of contract applies; there was no indication of permanent and pensionable engagement.
Whether there was unlawful termination
No termination; the relationship ended through effluxion of time on expiry of the final contract.
No notice of termination, dismissal letter or disciplinary proceedings were produced. Where parties agree a definite period, the contract naturally terminates on lapse of that period unless there is a contractual or statutory obligation to renew. Expiry of a fixed-term contract is not termination and cannot found a claim for unfair termination; the claimant also failed to demonstrate legitimate expectation of renewal.
Burden of proof for statutory employment claims
Underpayment, overtime, leave and public holiday claims failed for want of proof.
Sections 107 and 109 of the Evidence Act place the burden on the party alleging. Underpayment requires wage orders and proof of disparity; overtime requires strict proof of extra hours; leave claims shift to the employee where unchallenged leave records show leave was taken; public holiday claims require verifiable evidence. The claimant produced none, relying on bare assertions.
Legal principles established
#- Expiry of a fixed-term contract does not amount to termination or dismissal and does not ordinarily attract remedies for unfair termination.
- An employee must first establish the fact of termination before the employer is called upon to justify it.
- A fixed-term contract carries no automatic expectation of renewal unless founded on express representation or consistent conduct of the employer.
Court orders
#- 1.The claimant's suit is hereby dismissed
- 2.Each party shall bear its own costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations jurisdiction of the Chief Magistrate's Court; Employment Act, 2007
Relief refused
#Compensation for unfair and unlawful termination
Employment ended by effluxion of time on expiry of fixed-term contract; no termination by employer and no legitimate expectation of renewal
Claim for underpayment
No evidence of disparity between wages paid and statutory minimum; no computation, wage orders or periods produced
Claim for overtime compensation
Overtime claims require strict proof; claimant produced no attendance registers, rosters or corroborating evidence of extra hours
Claim for annual leave
Respondent produced unchallenged leave records showing leave was taken; burden shifted to claimant who failed to discharge it
Claim for public holiday pay
No specific holidays identified and no duty schedules, attendance or payroll records proving work on public holidays
Certificate of service
Claimant himself produced a certificate of service (CEXH No. 8) dated 8th July 2023
Costs
Each party shall bear its own costs, considering the nature of the employment relationship and to preserve industrial harmony.
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.
Accordingly, the claimant's suit is hereby dismissed. Considering the nature of the employment relationship and to preserve industrial harmony, each party shall bear its own costs.
The Court therefore finds that the employment relationship came to an end through effluxion of time and not through unlawful termination.
Where parties agree on a definite period of employment, the contract naturally terminates upon the lapse of that period unless there exists a contractual or statutory obligation to renew.
While the Court remains vigilant in protecting employees from unfair labour practices under Article 41 of the Constitution, such protection cannot relieve a litigant of the burden of proving his case.
Issues in the judgment
#The certificate of service provision is misstated - Section 51 of the Employment Act applies to contracts lasting more than four consecutive weeks, but the judgment states the opposite
The judgment is dated 30th July 2026, which postdates the CM ELRC No. 256 of 2023 filing and appears to contain a date anomaly
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Joseph v Wonder Feeds Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E256 of 2023) [2026] KEMC 398 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). CM ELRC No. 256 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2026/398/eng@2026-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.