Dickson Muteti Makau v AAR Healthcare Kenya Limited [2020] KEELRC 220 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court awarded a manager over Kshs 2.2 million because his employer could not prove his job was genuinely redundant or follow the proper retrenchment procedure.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether a redundancy situation existed
The Respondent failed to prove the alleged restructuring that rendered the claimant's office redundant
The Respondent alleged that a company split and legal changes caused the sales function to shift, but produced no board resolution, no evidence of the restructuring's timing or of other affected offices. The claimant's position still existed. The evidential burden lay on the employer and it was not discharged, so no redundancy situation was proved.
Whether the redundancy procedure complied with Section 40(1) of the Employment Act
The procedure was unlawful: the claimant got only 3 days' notice and the labour office was not notified
Section 40(1) requires not less than one month's notice to the employee and the labour officer. The claimant was notified on 28/11/2013 with termination effective 1/12/2013, and RW1 confirmed no labour office notice. Consultations occurred after the decision had been made, so the termination contravened the statute and was unfair.
Remedies for unfair termination by redundancy
Twelve months' compensation, notice pay, severance and leave pay awarded; unpleaded commission/deduction claim refused
Having found the redundancy unfair, the court awarded the maximum 12 months' compensation, one month's notice pay, severance at 15 days' pay per year of service and 11 days' leave pay. However, a claim for unlawful monthly deductions raised only in evidence, not in the pleadings, was refused because parties are bound by their pleadings.
Legal principles established
#- One month's notice of intended redundancy is compulsory and the labour officer must be informed
- An employer asserting redundancy must prove the operational reasons for it
Court orders
#- 1.Compensation equivalent to 12 months' salary for unfair and unjustified redundancy
- 2.One month's salary in lieu of notice
- 3.Redundancy dues of 15 days' pay for each year worked
- 4.Leave pay for 11 days
- 5.Total award of Kshs. 2,238,327/= less statutory deductions
- 6.Respondent to pay costs of the suit plus interest at court rates from the date of judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 41 of the Constitution and the Employment Act, the court being seized of an employment dispute under its statutory jurisdiction
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.
- Shihemi v Sendwave Limited (Cause E658 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1818 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 1818 (KLR)12 Jun 2025
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Dickson Muteti Makau v AAR Healthcare Kenya Limited [2020] KEELRC 220 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Cause No. 2213 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2020/220/eng@2020-10-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.