Ingasiani v Elevator General Services Kenya Limited & another (Cause E340 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 2556 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nairobi court awarded a former employee Kshs 281,000 for unfair termination because her employer showed up and proved nothing—though her pregnancy discrimination claim failed for lack of evidence.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether termination was unfair and unlawful
Termination was unfair and unlawful as the employer proved neither valid reasons nor fair procedure under sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act
Section 43(1) requires the employer to prove reasons for termination; section 45(2) requires validity and fairness; section 41(1) mandates notification and explanation. The 1st Respondent filed no defence and adduced no evidence, so the verbal termination was uncontroverted and the statutory burden was not discharged.
Whether the Claimant was discriminated against on grounds of pregnancy
Claim failed because the Claimant did not establish a prima facie case of pregnancy discrimination
Under section 5(7) of the Act the employer bears the burden of disproving discrimination, but the employee must first establish a prima facie case. The Claimant produced no medical records or birth notification to confirm pregnancy, and the letter dated 11th October 2021 was too confusing to establish the facts alleged.
Quantum of reliefs
Claimant awarded notice pay, five months' compensatory damages, seven months' salary arrears and leave pay for 18 months preceding separation
Uncontroverted claims for unpaid salary succeeded as the respondents filed no defence. Compensatory damages of five months took into account the short length of employment (approximately three years). Leave pay was restricted by section 28(4) of the Act to the 18 months preceding separation.
Legal principles established
#- An employer bears the burden of proving valid and fair reasons for termination and that a fair procedure was followed; failure to file a defence and adduce evidence means the burden is not discharged
- An employee alleging pregnancy discrimination must first establish a prima facie case, including proof of pregnancy and membership of a protected class, before the burden shifts to the employer
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that the Claimant's termination from employment was unfair and unlawful
- 2.One month's salary in lieu of notice of Kshs 20,000.00
- 3.Compensatory damages of Kshs 100,000.00 being five months' gross salary
- 4.Kshs 140,000.00 being outstanding salary arrears for seven months
- 5.Kshs 21,000.00 for unpaid leave days
- 6.Total award of Kshs 281,000.00
- 7.Interest at court rates from the date of judgment until payment in full
- 8.Costs of the suit to the Claimant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 (first-instance Statement of Claim under the ELRC)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ingasiani v Elevator General Services Kenya Limited & another (Cause E340 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 2556 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Cause No E340 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/2556/eng@2024-10-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.