Adhiambo v Eidu Education Limited (Cause E582 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2276 (KLR)

The Claimant was first employed as a Product Manager by an employment contract dated 18th August 2018 and retained the same job title and monthly salary of Kshs. 140,000 under the subsequent consultancy agreement. Her working hours were defined and regulated, meaning she could not take up other assignments, and she was supervised by the Respondent's Country Director. No evidence of withholding tax deduction was adduced, and the same absence of pension and medical benefits featured in both contracts. Applying Section 2 of the Employment Act and the multifactor test from case law, the court found an employment relationship.

Under Sections 43, 45 and 41 of the Employment Act, the employer bears the burden of proving a valid and fair reason for termination and observance of fair procedure. The termination letter did not disclose any reason, and the Claimant was not subjected to any pre-termination disciplinary process or given an opportunity to be heard. The Respondent contended no justification or procedure was required for a consultancy, but since the relationship was in substance employment, the statutory standards applied and were not met.

Although the termination letter was dated 21st March 2019, the Claimant testified she did not receive it until 20th June 2019, and the Respondent adduced no evidence to contradict that position. On that state of the evidence, the court found that no notice was given and awarded one month's salary in lieu of notice.

In awarding three months' salary in compensation, the court took into account the Claimant's length of service, her non-contribution to the termination, the Respondent's failure to disclose any reason and denial of a hearing, and the Respondent's failure to provide a pension benefit. Prorata leave for ten months was awarded; service pay was refused because the Claimant worked less than a year.