Munyoki v Tiramisu Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E6513 of 2020) [2024] KEELRC 51 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court awarded a dismissed master baker Kshs. 617,400 because his employer fired him without notice, a hearing, or a valid reason.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of summary dismissal
The summary dismissal was not for a valid reason and the employer did not follow a fair procedure, violating sections 36, 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act, 2007
The claimant was dismissed without a notice to show cause and without an opportunity to explain himself at a disciplinary hearing. RW1 confirmed there was no notice to show cause in the file and the notice to attend a disciplinary hearing was not acknowledged by the claimant. No valid reason for the dismissal was demonstrated by the respondent.
Identity of the true employer
On the initial contract of employment, the claimant's employer remained Tiramisu Limited; no superseding written contract with Zucchini was produced
RW1 asserted Tiramisu was wound up and its employees taken over by Zucchini, but produced no tangible documentary evidence of the wind-up. The dismissal letter was on Zucchini's letterhead, yet the claimant's payslips came from Tiramisu and the initial contract was with Tiramisu. No later written contract superseded that relationship.
Entitlement to gratuity
The claimant was entitled to Kshs. 180,000/= gratuity upon completing three years' service on 1st July 2015, which was never paid
Clause 1 of the contract provided for gratuity upon completion of three years' service. The unpaid gratuity may explain the respondent's efforts to change the identity of the employer without satisfying the existing contract's terms. The court found the amount owed and awarded it.
Compensation for unlawful and unfair dismissal
An award of eight months' salary (Kshs. 437,400/=) was appropriate under section 49(1)(c) and (4) of the Employment Act, 2007
The court considered the length of service (nine years as found), non-payment of gratuity, absence of compensation upon dismissal, and the loss of career advancement as a master baker. Relying on the authorities cited, eight months' salary was deemed appropriate compensation.
Legal principles established
#- A summary dismissal without a notice to show cause and without an opportunity to be heard at a disciplinary hearing violates sections 36, 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act, 2007
- An employee who has completed three years' service is entitled to gratuity under the terms of the contract, and any entity taking over the employment is equally bound by that obligation
- A claimant bears the responsibility of due diligence in establishing the correct employer before filing suit
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the claimant against the respondent in the sum of Kshs. 437,400/= being compensation for unlawful and unfair termination
- 2.Payment of Kshs. 180,000/= being unpaid gratuity
- 3.Total award of Kshs. 617,400/=
- 4.Interest at court rates from the date of judgment until payment in full
- 5.Costs of the suit to the claimant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court original jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 (sections 36, 41, 43, 45, 49(1)(c) and (4) applied)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Munyoki v Tiramisu Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E6513 of 2020) [2024] KEELRC 51 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in judgment (Employment and Labour Relations Court cause, filed 2/12/2020). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/51/eng@2024-01-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.