Mumali v Blink Studio Limited (Cause E080 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2112 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled a designer who stopped showing up to work deserted his job, so his employer's termination was fair and no compensation was owed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the parties were in a contract of service
- 2.How and for what reason the employment contract was terminated
- 3.Whether the termination was unfair in procedure and merits
- 4.What remedies, if any, the claimant was entitled to
- 5.Whether the respondent's counterclaim was established
Key legal issues
#Validity and fairness of the termination
Termination was not unfair either in procedure or merits; the stated reason that the arrangement was no longer productive existed and was genuine
The claimant failed to attend mandatory ISO 9001:2015 training, stopped reporting physically at work as the contract required, breached the confidentiality clause, and absconded contrary to clause 8.2 of the contract. The Court found desertion amounting to repudiation of the contract, accepted by the respondent's notice of termination. The misconducts would in any event have justified summary dismissal under section 44(1) of the Employment Act, so the procedure adopted was fair.
Whether the claimant was entitled to the monetary reliefs claimed
Only the statutory certificate of service was due; bonus, leave pay, compensation, severance and house allowance were refused
The bonus fell due at Christmas in December, and the claimant's service ended effective 30.11.2021, besides his undeserving performance. The leave claim lacked particulars and strict proof as special damages. Having found desertion and a fair termination, the Court declined notice pay and the 12 months' compensation.
The respondent's counterclaim
Partly established: return of the CAD workstation computer and an injunction on confidentiality, but no damages awarded
The claimant admitted possession of the CAD workstation computer, and the Court found the respondent entitled to its return. The claimant was bound by, and admitted breaching, the confidentiality clause. The Court nonetheless made no award of general damages, confining the counterclaim reliefs to delivery of the computer and the injunction.
Legal principles established
#- Desertion occurs when an employee by remaining absent for an extended period manifests by conduct an intention never to resume employment, and a notice of termination may amount to acceptance of that repudiation
- Where an employee's conduct amounts to fundamental breach, the employer may dismiss summarily without notice under section 44 of the Employment Act
Court orders
#- 1.The claimant to deliver the respondent's CAD workstation computer in sound operational status by 01.08.2025
- 2.Injunction restraining the claimant from using, sharing or disclosing any information or trade-secrets of the respondent acquired while in the respondent's employment and per the contractual confidentiality clause
- 3.The respondent to deliver the claimant's certificate of service by 01.08.2025 per section 51 of the Employment Act, 2007
- 4.Each party to bear own costs of the claimant's suit and the counter-claim
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 (first-instance employment claim and counterclaim)
Relief refused
#12 months' salary compensation for unfair termination
Termination was found fair; claimant deserted and contributed to his termination
Severance pay for 9 years
Not established; termination not unfair redundancy-based
Bonus for the year 2021
Bonus fell due at Christmas in December; claimant was terminated effective 30.11.2021 and performance undeserving
House allowance (9 years x 15% basic pay)
Salary was negotiated as inclusive of allowances per the respondent's case
One month leave pay
Claim wanting in particulars and strict proof required for special damages
Refund of pension contributions
Not established by the claimant
General damages for breach of employment contract (counterclaim)
No damages awarded despite findings on breach; only return of computer and injunction granted
Costs
Each party to bear own costs of the claimant's suit and the counter-claim
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
the claimant thereby became unsuitable or not compatible for continued employment as envisaged in section 45 of the Employment Act, 2007
desertion occurs when an employee by remaining absent for an extended period, manifests by his conduct an intention never to resume his employment
The Court finds that the respondent's notice of termination of the contract of employment substantially amounted to acceptance of the claimant's repudiation of the contract of service
an employer may dismiss an employee summarily when the employee has by his conduct indicated that he has fundamentally breached his obligations arising under the contract of service.
Each party to bear own costs of the claimant's suit and the counter-claim.
The claimant to deliver the respondent's CAD workstation computer in sound operational status by 01.08.2025.
Issues in the judgment
#Case number and citation of the suit are not stated in the judgment text provided; the document begins with blank numbered paragraphs
The judgment does not state the claimant's name; parties are referred to only as claimant and respondent
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Guni v African Marine & General Engineering & Co Ltd (Appeal E064 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2678 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 2678 (KLR)2 Oct 2025applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mumali v Blink Studio Limited (Cause E080 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2112 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment text provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2112/eng@2025-07-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.