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 E006 of 2024· [2025] KEELRC 1726 (KLR)

Sowanane & 62 others v Mediheal Group Limited & 16 others; National Health Insurance Fund & 2 others (Garnishee) (Cause E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1726 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
12 June 2025
1,679 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled that months of unpaid salaries forced 63 hospital staff to resign and awarded them arrears, notice pay and damages.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Sixty-three expatriate medical professionals sued Mediheal Group of Hospitals and 11 other Respondents at the Employment and Labour Relations Court in Nakuru, claiming salary arrears of Indian Rupees 186,069,164. They sought a declaration of constructive dismissal, payment of the arrears, 12 months' salary equivalent (Rupees 134,460,000), three months' salary in lieu of notice (Rupees 33,615,000), and in the alternative Rupees 135,360,000 as damages for unfair labour practice, plus interest, costs and certificates of service. The 12th Claimant, Girija Ballav Mahapatra, testified with the authority of the other 62 Claimants and produced 25 exhibits, including appointment letters and correspondence. The Respondents filed a response denying the claim but called no witness and filed no submissions. The court found that the appointment letters established employment; that the Respondents made repeated unfulfilled promises to pay, citing lender negotiations; and that the Claimants attempted arbitration, which the Respondents ignored, some contracts lacking arbitration clauses. Applying Section 17(1) and 18(2) of the Employment Act and the principles in Coca Cola East Africa v Maria Kagai Ligaga, the court held that months of non-payment went to the root of the contracts and amounted to constructive dismissal. It awarded the salary arrears, three months' notice pay, and 6 months' salary equivalent as general damages (Rupees 62,680,000) rather than the 12 months or alternative damages sought, with interest at 14% per annum, costs to the Claimants, and certificates of service to issue within 30 days.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether non-payment of salaries constituted constructive dismissal

Holding

Withholding salaries for months was an unfair labour practice which forced the Claimants to resign involuntarily, amounting to constructive termination

Reasoning

The court applied the principles in Coca Cola East Africa v Maria Kagai Ligaga that constructive dismissal requires conduct amounting to a fundamental or significant breach going to the root of the contract showing the employer no longer intends to be bound by essential terms. Failure to pay salaries constantly for several months goes to the root of the contract, leaving the employee vulnerable and embarrassed, and would push any employee to resign.

p. 6
02

Liability of the Respondents despite not calling evidence

Holding

The Respondents' pleadings carried no weight as they adduced no evidence and filed no submissions; the Claimants proved their claim

Reasoning

The Respondents filed a response dated 10th July 2024 denying the claim but presented no witness and filed no submissions. Relying on Mutua v Buxton Hospital Mombasa Ltd, the court held that failure to call evidence leaves pleadings as mere unsubstantiated statements. The Claimants proved unpaid salary arrears through appointment letters and the Respondents' own correspondence promising payment.

p. 6
03

Whether the dispute should have gone to arbitration

Holding

The Claimants attempted alternative dispute resolution through arbitration but the Respondents did not respond, and some contracts had no arbitration clause, so recourse to the court was proper

Reasoning

The Claimants requested appointment of an arbitrator by letter of 27th November 2023; the Respondents did not respond. CLARB attempted to appoint an arbitrator without success since some contracts lacked arbitration clauses. The court found the Claimants were willing to resolve the dispute through ADR but met resistance from the Respondents.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • An employer must pay the entire amount of wages earned by an employee for work done, in the currency of Kenya, and salaries are deemed due at the end of each month
  • Failure to pay an employee's salary constantly for several months goes to the root of the employment contract and constitutes constructive dismissal
  • A respondent who does not call evidence in proof of matters pleaded leaves the pleadings as mere unsubstantiated statements of fact

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the Claimants salary arrears amounting to Indian Rupees 186,069,164 as converted to Kenya shillings
  2. 2.The Respondents to pay salary of 3 months in lieu of notice amounting to Indian Rupees 33,615,000
  3. 3.The Respondents to pay 6 months' salary equivalent as general damages for unfair termination due to constructive dismissal, being Indian Rupees 62,680,000
  4. 4.Interest on court rates at 14% per annum from the date of judgment till full payment
  5. 5.Costs of the suit awarded to the Claimants
  6. 6.Certificates of service to be issued to the Claimants 30 days from the date of judgment

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 17(1)
  • Employment ActSection 18(2)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159(2)(d)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 48
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 1B
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 21 Rule 1

Cases cited (3)

  • Kiboko -Vs- Osteria Group (Kenya) Limited
  • Coca Cola East Africa -VS- Maria Kagai Ligaga
    2015(eKLR)
  • Mutua -VS- Buxton Hospital Mombasa Ltd
    (2024) KEELRC 1552
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and labour relations jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court; contracts of employment provided that Kenyan law would apply in case disputes arose

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Sowanane & 62 others v Mediheal Group Limited & 16 others; National Health Insurance Fund & 2 others (Garnishee) (Cause E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1726 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Cause No E006 of 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1726/eng@2025-06-12

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