Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedFormerly HCCC No 395 of 2008 (High Court at Milimani), Memorandum of Claim dated 1st March 2023· [2025] KEELRC 2179 (KLR)

Nzau & 2 others v Crescent Construction Company Limited (Cause 484 of 2020) [2025] KEELRC 2179 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
24 July 2025
LNLinnet Ndolo
1,340 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

#

Kenya's Employment Court ruled that ending project-based workers' contracts when the project finished was lawful, and dismissed all their monetary claims for lack of proof.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimants, former drivers employed by the Respondent between 2006 and 2007, sued for wrongful termination and various monetary claims: housing allowance, service charge deductions, overtime, unpaid leave, unpaid public holidays/Sundays, salary arrears, payment in lieu of notice, damages for premature termination and unremitted NSSF deductions, plus certificates of service. The matter originated in the High Court as HCCC No 395 of 2008 and was transferred to the Employment and Labour Relations Court in July 2020, with a Memorandum of Claim filed in March 2023. Only the 1st Claimant testified; the Respondent called no witness and only the Respondent filed written submissions. The court framed two issues: lawfulness of the termination and entitlement to remedies. On the first, it held that employees engaged for specific projects are on fixed term contracts whose end date coincides with project completion, following the Court of Appeal decisions in Registered Trustees of the Presbyterian Church of East Africa v Ruth Gathoni Ngotho Kariuki and Trocaire v Catherine Wambui Karuno. The one-month termination notices citing completion of work were consistent with the Memoranda of Agreement, so the termination was lawful and fair, and damages for premature termination and payment in lieu of notice were disallowed. All other monetary claims failed for want of proof. The entire claim was dismissed with each party bearing their own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether termination upon completion of a project was lawful and fair

Holding

Termination was lawful; the Claimants were engaged on project-based fixed term contracts and were given one-month notices

Reasoning

The Respondent's defence was that employment was pegged on specific projects whose completion determined the end date. The termination notices expressly invoked the Memorandum of Agreement and cited completion of work. Fixed term contracts carry no expectation of renewal, and the 1st Claimant's assertion that projects were ongoing was uncorroborated as his co-claimants did not testify.

p. 4
02

Whether the Claimants were entitled to the monetary remedies claimed

Holding

All monetary claims failed for lack of proof

Reasoning

The burden of proving the claims lay on the Claimants. They neither corroborated their claims through additional testimony nor adduced documentary evidence. The Respondent filed no submissions but the court found the claims for house allowance, service charge, overtime, leave, public holidays, underpayment and NSSF deductions unproved.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • Fixed term contracts carry no rights, obligations or expectations of renewal beyond the date of expiry
  • Employees engaged to work in specific projects are employed on fixed term contracts whose end date coincides with completion of the project

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Claimants' entire claim is dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to bear their own costs

Authorities

#

Cases cited (3)

  • Registered Trustees of the Presbyterian Church of East Africa & another v Ruth Gathoni Ngotho Kariuki
    [2017] eKLR
  • Trocaire v Catherine Wambui Karuno
    [2018] eKLR
  • British Broadcasting Corporation vs Ioannou
    [1975] 2 All ER 999
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction following transfer from the High Court by order of Kasango J dated 22nd July 2020

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Nzau & 2 others v Crescent Construction Company Limited (Cause 484 of 2020) [2025] KEELRC 2179 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Formerly HCCC No 395 of 2008 (High Court at Milimani), Memorandum of Claim dated 1st March 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2179/eng@2025-07-24

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