Wesley C Koskey v Style Industries Ltd [2018] KEELRC 15 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled a worker's dismissal unfair because the employer gave no notice, reasons or hearing, but treatment notes did not count as sick leave proof.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Procedural fairness of the termination
The termination was procedurally unfair as the claimant was not given notice, reasons or a hearing
There was no defence and no letter of termination; on the claimant's sworn evidence the court accepted he was not issued with notice, reason or a hearing before termination. Even if summary dismissal for absence were warranted under section 44(4), section 41(2) required a hearing, which the respondent did not give or explain the absence of. The termination therefore failed the section 41 procedural safeguards and was unfair under section 45.
Sick leave entitlement and proof under section 30
The claimant's treatment card from Upendo Clinic did not satisfy the requirement of a certificate of incapacity signed by a qualified medical practitioner
Section 30 entitles an employee to sick leave subject to production of a certificate of incapacity to work signed by a duly qualified medical practitioner. The treatment records attached to the claim were not such a certificate; treatment notes or cards cannot be construed as a medical certificate justifying absence from work. Without a defence the court could not establish whether the time off was authorised.
Remedies for unfair termination
Notice pay under section 35 and compensation of three months' gross wage awarded
Where termination is procedurally unfair, notice pay is due; the claimant earned Kshs. 10,108.00 per his January 2017 pay statement and was awarded one month's notice pay under section 35. Compensation for unfair termination was assessed at three months' gross wage (Kshs. 30,324.00) rather than the twelve months sought.
Legal principles established
#- Treatment notes or treatment cards do not constitute a medical certificate as required under section 30 of the Employment Act to secure sick leave
- Even where summary dismissal for absence is warranted, the procedural safeguards of a hearing under section 41(2) of the Employment Act must be observed
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the claimant against the respondent for compensation award of Kshs. 30,324.00
- 2.Notice pay of Kshs. 10,108.00 awarded
- 3.Costs of the suit awarded to the claimant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 (unfair termination claim under sections 41, 45)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Charo v Shreeji Enterprises Limited (Appeal E254 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2684 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 2684 (KLR)2 Oct 2025applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wesley C Koskey v Style Industries Ltd [2018] KEELRC 15 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Cause No. 144 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/15/eng@2018-06-14
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.