Nyaga v County Sacco Society Limited (Cause E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1328 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court upheld a Sacco manager's dismissal but still ordered her employer to pay over Kshs.1.2 million in service gratuity earned over 26 years.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the dismissal was substantively unfair
The dismissal was substantively fair; the claimant admitted the misconduct of delaying the opening of the Karurumo branch
The court found the claimant admitted the offence of causing the branch to open at 9.21am instead of 8.30am, in her response to the show cause letter, the statement of claim, her witness statement and submissions. The employer therefore demonstrated a valid reason under sections 43 and 45(2) of the Employment Act, and the claimant failed to discharge the burden of proving unfair termination on a balance of probability.
Whether the dismissal was procedurally unfair
Procedural fairness was satisfied; the claimant was invited to a disciplinary hearing but declined to attend
The claimant was invited to a disciplinary hearing on 5th December 2022 but chose not to attend, instead filing an application for interpretation of the earlier judgment. She obtained no order stopping the hearing and no postponement letter from the employer. Relying on the cases cited by the respondent, the court held she squandered the opportunity to defend herself and cannot accuse the employer of procedural unfairness under section 41.
Entitlement to service gratuity
The claimant is entitled to service gratuity under section 9(v) of the CBA, computed at Kshs.1,295,918 for 26 years of service
Although the dismissal was upheld, the court perused the CBA and confirmed that an employee whose services are terminated is entitled to service gratuity at the rate of 30 days' pay for every year worked. With 26 years of service and a salary of Kshs.49,843, the court computed the gratuity at Kshs.1,295,918, substituting its own calculation for the claimant's pleaded figure of Kshs.1,428,752.
Legal principles established
#- Unfair termination requires proof of absence of valid reason and/or absence of fair procedure, codified under Article 47 of the Constitution and section 45 of the Employment Act
- An employee who is afforded an opportunity to defend herself at a disciplinary hearing but squanders it cannot blame the employer for unfair termination
- An employer remains obliged to remit provident fund contributions for the suspension period even where the employee's specific claim is unsubstantiated
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the claimant against the respondent for payment of service gratuity of Kshs.1,295,918.00
- 2.Costs of the suit awarded to the claimant
- 3.Interest at court rates from the date of filing the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over unfair termination and employment benefits claims under the Employment Act, 2007
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nyaga v County Sacco Society Limited (Cause E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1328 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1328/eng@2025-05-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.