Mwikali v The Raphaelites (Cause 1150 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 1948 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employer who ignored an unfair dismissal suit was ordered to pay Kshs.179,000, proving silence in court is costly.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Entitlement to terminal dues and compensation for unfair termination in an undefended suit
Judgment entered for the claimant for notice pay, leave pay, salary for days worked and four months' salary as compensation for unfair termination, with costs and interest.
The claimant pleaded and testified that she was employed on a verbal contract at Kshs.30,000 per month and terminated by SMS without reason or procedure. The respondent, though served, entered neither appearance nor defence, so the allegations went unrebutted. The court assessed notice pay (one month's salary), leave pay, salary for eight days worked in August 2015, and four months' salary as compensation for the unfair termination.
Legal principles established
#- In an undefended cause where the respondent produces no rebuttal, the claimant's uncontroverted allegations sustain judgment.
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the claimant against the respondent
- 2.Salary in lieu of notice Kshs.30,000
- 3.Payment in lieu of leave Kshs.21,000
- 4.Salary for 8 days worked in August Kshs.8,000
- 5.Four months' salary as compensation for unfair termination Kshs.120,000 (total Kshs.179,000)
- 6.Costs of the suit to the claimant, with interest at court rates subject to statutory deductions
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes (statutory provision not expressly cited in judgment)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mwikali v The Raphaelites (Cause 1150 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 1948 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/1948/eng@2023-07-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.