Oloo v Freight Forwarders Solutions (SEZ) Limited (Cause E759 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1754 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled a dismissal unfair because the employer could not independently prove the misconduct and withheld key evidence from the employee before his disciplinary hearing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Justifiable reason for dismissal
The Respondent failed to prove a valid reason for dismissal
The Claimant and RW1 each blamed the other for stopping the outbound scanning of Colgate products - a credibility contest. RW1 was himself under investigation, and no independent evidence corroborated his account. The disciplinary panel adopted RW1's version without verification. The job description did not clearly cover supervising loading. The Respondent therefore failed to discharge its evidential burden under Sections 43(1) and 45(2)(a) and (b) of the Employment Act.
Procedural fairness
The dismissal was procedurally unfair under Section 41
Although a Notice to Show Cause was issued and a hearing held, there was no evidence the Claimant was advised of his right to be accompanied by a fellow employee or shop floor representative. Further, RW1's incriminating statement was not shared with the Claimant before the hearing despite being the basis of the finding of culpability. Withholding crucial evidentiary material breached the fair hearing requirements of Section 41 and Section 45(2)(c).
Lawfulness of the change of role and salary review
The demotion from Inbound Supervisor to Picking Team Leader was lawful as it was consented to in writing
Section 10(5) of the Employment Act requires changes to be reflected in a revised contract notified to the employee in writing. The letter of 29th July 2022 notified the change of role and salary; the Claimant signed the new contract on 4th August 2022, was confirmed by letter of 6th October 2022, and served without protest until dismissal. The change was therefore effected with his written consent and he cannot disown the new terms.
Compensation for unfair termination
Compensatory damages of five months' salary awarded
Having found both substantive and procedural unfairness, the Court awarded compensatory damages equivalent to five months of the Claimant's last salary of Kshs 90,000, taking into account the length of the employment relationship and the circumstances of termination, under Section 49 of the framework of Section 45.
Legal principles established
#- Under Sections 43(1) and 45(2)(a) and (b) of the Employment Act, the employer bears the burden of proving valid reasons for termination; uncorroborated, conflicting accounts between employees will not discharge that burden
- An employee is entitled to documents in the employer's possession which would assist in preparing a defence to disciplinary charges; withholding them breaches Section 41
- A variation of a job role and salary effected with the employee's written consent complies with Section 10(5) of the Employment Act and cannot later be disowned
- Damages for future salary under a residual contract term are anticipatory and not awardable
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that the termination of the Claimant from employment was unfair and unlawful
- 2.Compensatory damages of Kshs 450,000.00 being equivalent to five (5) months of his last salary
- 3.Interest on the award at court rates from the date of Judgment until payment in full
- 4.The Claimant shall have the costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment and labour relations disputes (Employment Act; Articles 41 and 47 of the Constitution invoked)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Oloo v Freight Forwarders Solutions (SEZ) Limited (Cause E759 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1754 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Cause No E759 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1754/eng@2025-06-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.