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 judgment· [2025] KEELRC 2277 (KLR)

Lumumba v Keitt Exporters Limited (Cause E201 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2277 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
31 July 2025
LNLinnet Ndolo
2,015 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, employed as Digital Transformation Assistant Manager from 2nd November 2020 at a monthly salary of Kshs. 150,000, had her employment terminated on 2nd February 2022 on account of redundancy. She sued, alleging the termination was unlawful and unfair: no notice of redundancy, no hearing, no valid reasons, and no certificate of service. The Respondent maintained that the redundancy followed Section 40 of the Employment Act, with notice to the Labour Officer and the Claimant, consultations, and operational reasons arising from the failure of a digital transformation project. The court framed two issues: lawfulness and fairness of the termination, and entitlement to remedies. Relying on settled authority that the Section 40(1)(a) and (b) redundancy notice is distinct from the Section 40(1)(f) termination notice and that consultation is essential, the court found the Respondent adduced no evidence of notice or consultation; its HR witness was not privy to the events. No selection criterion was established and no statutory payments were made. The termination was held substantively and procedurally unfair. The court awarded six months' salary in compensation (Kshs. 900,000) instead of the twelve sought, plus the admitted dues: one month's notice pay (Kshs. 150,000), two days' salary (Kshs. 10,000) and severance pay for one completed year (Kshs. 75,000), totalling Kshs. 1,135,000, with interest at court rates from judgment until payment in full. The Claimant was also awarded a certificate of service and costs of the case. Judgment delivered virtually at Nairobi on 31st July 2025 by Linnet Ndolo, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the termination on account of redundancy complied with Section 40 of the Employment Act

Holding

The termination was substantively and procedurally unfair: no redundancy notice was served, no consultation occurred, no selection criterion was established and statutory payments were not made

Reasoning

The court set out the statutory conditions in Section 40(1), emphasising the one-month notice to the employee and Labour Officer and the requirement of consultation, drawing on the Kenya Airways and German School Society authorities. The Respondent alleged prior notice and consultation but adduced no evidence; its HR witness was not privy to the events preceding termination. The Respondent also failed to establish a selection criterion under Section 40(1)(c) and made none of the statutory payments, leading to a finding of both procedural and substantive unfairness.

p. 5
02

Whether the Claimant is entitled to the remedies sought

Holding

Partly: 6 months' salary in compensation (rather than 12), plus admitted dues of notice pay, 2 days' salary and severance pay, certificate of service and costs

Reasoning

The court exercised discretion to award six months' salary in compensation, considering the Claimant's length of service (just over one year), her non-contribution to the termination, and the Respondent's unexplained withholding of terminal dues and certificate of service. The claims for one month's salary in lieu of notice, salary for two days in February 2022 and severance pay at 15 days per completed year were admitted and payable as quantified.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • The redundancy notice contemplated by Section 40(1)(a) and (b) of the Employment Act is separate and distinct from the termination notice required under Section 40(1)(f)
  • Consultation with parties to be affected by an intended redundancy is a critical ingredient of the redundancy notice and essential to substantive fairness
  • An employer who fails to serve a redundancy notice, consult, establish a selection criterion and make statutory payments effects an unfair termination

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Judgment entered in favour of the Claimant for Kshs. 1,135,000 comprising 6 months' salary in compensation (Kshs. 900,000), 1 month's salary in lieu of notice (Kshs. 150,000), salary for 2 days in February 2022 (Kshs. 10,000) and severance pay for 1 complete year (Kshs. 75,000)
  2. 2.The award to attract interest at court rates from the date of judgment until payment in full
  3. 3.The Claimant to be issued with a certificate of service
  4. 4.The Respondent to pay the costs of the case
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act (Article 162(2) basis implied; judgment proceeds under Section 40 of the Employment Act)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Lumumba v Keitt Exporters Limited (Cause E201 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2277 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2277/eng@2025-07-31

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