Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially Allowednull (not stated in the judgment)· [2025] KEELRC 455 (KLR)

Ngila v Kenya Breweries Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E775 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 455 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
18 February 2025
HWHellen Wasilwa
8,674 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~35 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya Breweries lost an unfair dismissal case because it couldn't prove the employee actually missed agreed targets or was helped to improve before being fired.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, employed by Kenya Breweries Ltd from 2014 and promoted in 2017 to Area Business Development Manager on a gross monthly salary of Kshs 223,496.54, was summarily dismissed on 30th October 2019 on grounds of gross negligence, poor performance and integrity issues arising from ineffective distributor management, poor leadership scores (including a 17% MPA score) and alleged integrity lapses. She sought a declaration of unfair and wrongful dismissal, 12 months' compensation (Kshs 2,681,952), payment for 62 accrued leave days (Kshs 670,480), interest, a certificate of service and costs. The Respondent defended the dismissal as lawful under Sections 41, 44 and 45 of the Employment Act, 2007, citing a prior July 2019 warning over fraudulent concur expense claims, the distributor's undercapitalisation and overdue accounts, and the claimant's failure to coach her team; it denied that an appeal was lodged and conditioned terminal dues on clearance. The court framed three issues: validity of reasons, due process, and remedies. It found the respondent failed to prove that agreed targets were not met or that measures were taken to support improvement, so there were no valid reasons for dismissal; but it found due process was accorded, as the claimant answered show-cause letters and a disciplinary hearing. Holding the dismissal substantively unfair, the court awarded 6 months' compensation (Kshs 1,340,976) and, the leave claim being unchallenged, 62 days' leave pay (Kshs 461,892), totalling Kshs 1,802,868 less statutory deductions, with costs and interest to the claimant. The certificate of service prayer was not addressed in the final orders. Judgment was delivered virtually at Nairobi on 18th February 2025 by Hellen Wasilwa, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Validity of reasons for termination

Holding

The respondent failed to prove valid reasons for the dismissal; no evidence that agreed targets were not delivered or that the claimant was given an opportunity to improve

Reasoning

The dismissal letter cited gross negligence. The court held that where dismissal is grounded on negligence or poor performance, the employer must prove the employee failed agreed targets, must have a policy or practice for measuring performance, and must show measures to help the employee improve. The respondent did none of these, so the burden under Sections 43 and 45 of the Employment Act was not discharged.

p. 14
02

Procedural fairness (due process)

Holding

The claimant was accorded due process; she was issued show-cause letters, attended a disciplinary hearing, and was allowed to respond to the charges

Reasoning

The minutes of the disciplinary hearing produced in court showed the charges were read to the claimant and she responded. She was invited by letter dated 4th October 2019 to a hearing on 8th October 2019 and signed the minutes. Section 41 was therefore satisfied despite the substantive unfairness finding.

p. 15
03

Remedies for unfair termination

Holding

Compensation of 6 months' salary awarded (reduced because procedure was fair), plus 62 days' unchallenged leave pay

Reasoning

Section 45(2) renders termination unfair where the employer fails to prove a valid reason. Compensation under Section 49 was fixed at 6 months because due process was followed. The 62 days' accrued leave claim was not objected to by the respondent and was awarded as prayed.

p. 15

Legal principles established

#
  • An employer terminating an employee for poor performance or negligence must demonstrate the measures put in place to assess and support the employee's improvement, and must show that agreed performance targets were not met
  • Where the employer fails to prove a valid reason for termination, the dismissal is unfair under Section 45(2) of the Employment Act, even if procedure was fair

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Declaration that the claimant's dismissal was unfair and unjustified
  2. 2.Respondent to pay compensation for unfair dismissal of 6 months' salary (6 x 223,496 = Kshs 1,340,976)
  3. 3.Respondent to pay 62 days' accrued leave pay (62/30 x 223,496 = Kshs 461,892)
  4. 4.Total award of Kshs 1,802,868 less statutory deductions
  5. 5.Respondent to pay costs of the suit plus interest at court rates from the date of the judgment
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes (Employment Act, 2007; unfair termination claim under Sections 41, 43, 44, 45)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ngila v Kenya Breweries Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E775 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 455 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). null (not stated in the judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/455/eng@2025-02-18

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.