Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment· [2025] KEELRC 2251 (KLR)

BGSB Conrete Africa Limited v Kumar (Cause E602 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2251 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
25 July 2025
SRStella Rutto
1,709 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 awarded an employer Kshs 14.6 million after a former foreman's own letter admitted leaking secrets to competitors, though a two-year non-compete injunction lapsed.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
In an undefended cause heard by formal proof, BGSB Concrete Africa Ltd claimed that its former Senior Foreman, Rajiv Kumar, breached his contract of employment by disclosing confidential operational and pricing information to competitors, engaging in employee poaching, and providing technical assistance and manpower to rival concrete flooring businesses, causing it loss of Kshs 14,674,660/=. The Claimant relied principally on a handwritten letter dated 18th April 2024 in which the Respondent admitted leaking confidential information since 2022, providing manpower to competitors, and causing the company to lose a work order worth Kshs 14,674,660/=. The Respondent neither entered appearance nor filed a defence despite service through electronic means, so the matter proceeded as an undefended cause, with the Claimant's General Manager, Preetjyot Singh Rekhi, giving uncontroverted evidence. Applying Sunrose Nurseries Limited v Gatoka Limited, the court held that an admission may be made in correspondence and must be unequivocal; it found the letter's authenticity unimpeached and the admission unequivocal, establishing breach of Clauses 3 and 4 of the employment contract. The court awarded the admitted sum of Kshs 14,674,660 as damages for loss of business with interest at court rates from the date of judgment, and costs to the Claimant. However, the sought two-year injunction was refused as its period had lapsed, rendering the suit only partially successful.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Respondent's handwritten letter constituted an unequivocal admission of breach of contract

Holding

The letter dated 18th April 2024 was an unequivocal admission by correspondence of breach of Clauses 3 and 4 of the employment contract; its authenticity was not impeached since the Respondent did not participate.

Reasoning

Relying on Sunrose Nurseries v Gatoka, the court held an admission may be in correspondence and must be unequivocal. The unchallenged letter admitted disclosing confidential information and providing manpower to competitors. As the Respondent neither filed a defence nor participated, the letter's authenticity was not questioned, establishing breach.

p. 3
02

Whether the Claimant was entitled to damages of Kshs 14,674,660 for loss of business

Holding

The Claimant was awarded the full admitted sum as damages for loss of business.

Reasoning

The Claimant pleaded loss of Kshs 14,674,660/= and the Respondent's letter expressly admitted causing that loss ('BGSB lost the work order 14,674,660/= because of me'). On formal proof the court found the admitted sum payable as damages for breach of the employment contract.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • An admission justifying judgment on admission may be contained in correspondence or other document and must be unequivocal and clear.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Claim is allowed and the Claimant is awarded the sum of Kshs 14,674,660.00 being damages for loss of business as a result of breach of the contract of employment by the Respondent.
  2. 2.The award shall attract interest at court rates from the date of Judgment until payment in full.
  3. 3.The Respondent shall bear the costs of the suit.

Authorities

#

Legislation

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

Cases cited (4)

  • Choitram v Nazari
    [1984] eKLR
  • Sunrose Nurseries Limited v Gatoka Limited
    [2014] eKLR
  • Gilbert v Smith
    [1876] 2 Ch D 686
  • Kiprotich v Gathua and others
    [1976] KLR 87
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over the claim of breach of contract of employment (Article 162(2) jurisdiction implied; not expressly cited)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "BGSB Conrete Africa Limited v Kumar (Cause E602 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2251 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2251/eng@2025-07-25

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