Nation Media Group Limited v Mugumo Munene
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed employers must genuinely prove a redundancy and follow proper notice procedures, or pay employees up to 12 months' salary in compensation.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Substantive validity of the redundancy
The appellant failed to prove valid reasons for the redundancy; no evidence of the reorganisation, the class of employees affected, or the selection criteria was produced
Under section 43(1) of the Employment Act the employer must prove the reasons for termination, failing which the termination is deemed unfair. The redundancy letter alluded to a reorganisation of the editorial department, but no evidence of that reorganisation, of the affected class of employees, or of selection based on seniority, skill, ability and reliability under section 40 was tendered. The evidential burden lay on the employer and was not discharged, so the trial court's finding of no valid grounds could not be faulted.
Procedural fairness of the redundancy
Termination effected the same day as the redundancy letter, with no notice to the employee, union or labour officer, was procedurally improper
Section 40 requires written notice of intended redundancy at least a month in advance to the union or employee and the labour officer,eliciting consultation. The respondent was handed the letter and required to leave the office the same day. Following Maraga JA's exposition in Kenya Airways, notice precedes consultation, and consultation is imperative under the Employment Act and Labour Relations Act. The respondent had no opportunity to be heard or mitigate. The termination failed both substantive and procedural tests.
Quantum of compensation for unfair termination
The award of 10 months' salary under section 49(1)(c) was reasonable given the manner of termination and within judicial discretion guided by section 49(4)
Section 49(1)(c) permits up to 12 months' gross salary as compensation. The guidelines in section 49(4) were considered; the respondent lost employment without notice in a most cavalier manner. The trial Judge articulated the basis of the award, satisfying the requirement in Ol Pejeta that reasons justify the award. Compensation is discretionary, distinct from terminal dues already paid, so the payment of dues does not enrich the employee unjustly or offset compensation.
Legal principles established
#- An employer asserting redundancy bears the burden of demonstrating a genuine redundancy situation and compliance with section 40 of the Employment Act, including prior notice to the employee/union and the labour officer and the criteria of selection
- A redundancy declared and effected on the same day, without notice or consultation, is procedurally unfair; courts do not substitute their judgment for the employer's business decision but must be satisfied the decision was genuine, rational and lawfully arrived at
- Compensation for unfair termination under section 49 of the Employment Act is a remedy separate from and additional to terminal dues, and terminal dues do not offset it
Court orders
#- 1.The judgment dated 10/11 November 2020 of the ELRC (H. Wasilwa J.) in ELRC Cause No. 975 of 2016 is upheld in its entirety
- 2.The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- ELRC Cause No. 975 of 2016
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over the Employment and Labour Relations Court (the judgment does not cite the specific constitutional/statutory provision)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (4)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Kitema v Perfect Scan Limited (Appeal E039 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2682 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 2682 (KLR)2 Oct 2025applied
- Ainu Shamsi Hauliers Limited v Msagha (Appeal E054 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2310 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 2310 (KLR)31 Jul 2025applied
- Mweni v Child Welfare Society of Kenya (Appeal E040 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1951 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 1951 (KLR)30 Jun 2025followed
- Corrugated Sheets Limited v Kalama & 10 others (Appeal E021 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1091 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 1091 (KLR)3 Apr 2025applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nation Media Group Limited v Mugumo Munene", Case Analysis (2025). null — the judgment does not state the appeal number (only ELRC Cause No. 975 of 2016 below is named). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/114/eng@2025-01-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.