Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedELRC Nairobi Cause E072 of 2023· [2025] KEELRC 1898 (KLR)

Odek v UBA Bank Kenya Limited (Cause E072 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1898 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
25 June 2025
DMD. K. Njagi Marete
1,135 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

An employee claiming extra pay for acting in a higher role must prove the terms changed — a signed acting appointment letter fixing her original terms defeated the claim.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, employed by the Respondent bank as a Relationship Manager from 1st September 2019 at a gross salary of Kshs.312,500, claimed that she acted as Branch Manager at the Upper Hill Branch for 23 months and 11 days until her resignation on 11th May 2022, without the commensurate salary of Kshs.450,000. She sought a declaration entitling her to accrued acting allowance of Kshs.3,212,917, damages for discrimination, costs and interest. The Respondent denied the claim, contending that the acting appointment by letter dated 27th May 2020 was for a limited period of five months (1st June to 30th November 2020) and expressly provided that all terms and conditions of employment remained the same, that the Claimant accepted those terms, that she had been cautioned over performance, and that the claim was an abuse of process. The court framed three issues: entitlement to accrued acting allowance, entitlement to general damages for discrimination, and costs. It held that the 27th May 2020 letter was clear on the terms of the acting deployment and that the Claimant's execution of it signified acceptance; the claim was unsubstantiated and amounted to an attempt at unjust enrichment. No evidence supported the discrimination claim. The claim was dismissed with each party bearing their own costs. Judgment was delivered on 25th June 2025 by D. K. Njagi Marete, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Claimant was entitled to accrued acting allowance for acting as Branch Manager beyond the appointed period

Holding

The claim failed; the acting appointment letter of 27 May 2020 was for a limited period of five months and expressly provided that all terms and conditions of employment remained the same, which the Claimant accepted

Reasoning

The court found the 27 May 2020 letter clear on the terms of deployment in acting capacity, tying back to the 29 July 2019 appointment letter. The Claimant's acceptance by executing the letter signified acceptance of those terms. No evidence substantiated the alleged extension of the acting period or entitlement to the higher salary, so the claim was dishonest and an attempt at unjust enrichment.

p. 3
02

Whether the Claimant was entitled to general damages for discrimination

Holding

The prayer for damages for discrimination failed for want of evidence

Reasoning

The court held that the acting appointment letter read with the letter of appointment set out the terms of employment and acting capacity, and no evidence to the contrary or in support of discrimination was adduced. The authority of Edah Cherono Maiywa relied on by the Claimant was not sufficient without evidentiary support.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A party who alleges that an acting appointment was extended beyond the stated period or that terms changed bears the burden of proving it under section 107(1) of the Evidence Act

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The claim is dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to bear their own costs of the suit

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 41(1), 2(a)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 27(1) and (2)
  • Evidence Act, Chapter 80, Laws of KenyaSection 107(1)

Cases cited (1)

  • Edah Cherono Maiywa v University of Nairobi Enterprises & Services Ltd
    [2020] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Constitution and employment law (Articles 41(1), (2)(a) and 27(1) and (2) invoked by the Claimant)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Odek v UBA Bank Kenya Limited (Cause E072 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1898 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELRC Nairobi Cause E072 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1898/eng@2025-06-25

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