Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedCause No 158 of 2018· [2025] KEELRC 1615 (KLR)

Sang v Camellia Kenya Limited (Cause 158 of 2018) [2025] KEELRC 1615 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
29 May 2025
2,048 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled a worker's dismissal unfair because the employer could not prove a valid reason or keep proper records, awarding terminal dues.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant sued the Respondent seeking a declaration that his termination was unlawful, terminal benefits totalling about Kshs. 1,199,575 including pay in lieu of notice, leave dues, overtime, house allowance, gratuity, underpayments, December 2017 salary and twelve months' compensation. The Respondent denied employing the Claimant or, alternatively, that termination and remuneration were improper. The Claimant testified he was employed in 2008 picking tea and later stationed in a shop, was told work had gone down and to wait to be recalled, and was never recalled. RW1, Boaz Kipkosgei Kata, admitted the Claimant was his employee at Camellia but said the business was incorporated in 2010, collapsed after his property was auctioned, and all employees lost jobs; he admitted no notice, no pay in lieu of notice, no house allowance, and no certificate of service. The court found employment commenced in May 2010 based on the certificate of incorporation and NSSF statement, and that termination without notice and without proved valid reason was unfair. The court awarded notice pay (Kshs. 9,000), leave dues (Kshs. 65,423.10), underpayments (Kshs. 294,484.40), house allowance (Kshs. 114,990), December 2017 salary (Kshs. 9,000), and six months' compensation (Kshs. 54,000). Overtime and gratuity were refused. Costs and interest from judgment were awarded to the Claimant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Commencement date of employment

Holding

Employment commenced in May 2010, not 2008

Reasoning

The Respondent produced a certificate of incorporation dated 30th April 2010, and the Claimant's NSSF statement showed contributions beginning May 2010, consistent with RW1's evidence that the company was incorporated in 2010 and the Claimant began working for it that year.

p. 5
02

Unfair termination

Holding

Termination without notice and without proved valid reason was unfair

Reasoning

RW1 admitted no notice of termination was issued and none was paid in lieu. The Respondent alleged the business collapsed and was auctioned but adduced no documentary proof. The burden of justifying termination lies on the employer; failing proof of valid reason, the termination was unfair.

p. 5
03

Leave dues and house allowance

Holding

Awarded because the employer failed to prove payment

Reasoning

The Claimant testified he was not paid while on leave and not paid house allowance. RW1 confirmed the Claimant was not housed or paid house allowance. The Respondent's claim that records were lost in an auction was unsupported by evidence.

p. 5
04

Compensation for unfair termination

Holding

Six months' salary awarded taking into account the employer's financial difficulties

Reasoning

Having found unfair termination, the court exercised discretion to award six months' salary rather than twelve, taking into account the Respondent's stated reason that the company could not meet its financial obligations.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • The employer bears the burden of proving a valid reason for termination and compliance with fair procedure
  • An employer who alleges loss of employment records through auction must adduce evidence of that auction

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Declaration that the termination was unfair
  2. 2.Award of Kshs. 9,000 pay in lieu of notice
  3. 3.Award of Kshs. 65,423.10 pay during annual leave for 9 years
  4. 4.Award of Kshs. 294,484.40 underpayments
  5. 5.Award of Kshs. 114,990 house allowance
  6. 6.Award of Kshs. 9,000 salary for December 2017
  7. 7.Award of Kshs. 54,000 being 6 months' salary as compensation for unfair termination
  8. 8.Costs of the suit awarded to the Claimant
  9. 9.Interest at court rates from date of judgment

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActNot specified
  • Wages General OrderMaximum 52 hours per week
  • General Amendment Order 2017Not specified
  • Legal Notice No. 38Minimum wage
  • Legal Notice No. 97Minimum wage
  • Legal Notice No. 63/2011Minimum wage
  • Legal Notice No. 117Minimum wage
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes under the Employment Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Sang v Camellia Kenya Limited (Cause 158 of 2018) [2025] KEELRC 1615 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Cause No 158 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1615/eng@2025-05-29

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