Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedMemorandum of Claim dated 25th May 2018· [2025] KEELRC 2281 (KLR)

Kuria v Safaricom Public Limited Company (Cause 977 of 2018) [2025] KEELRC 2281 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
31 July 2025
LNLinnet Ndolo
1,534 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Employment Court dismissed a Safaricom employee's constructive dismissal claim, holding that resigning over an unfavourable grievance outcome does not amount to unlawful dismissal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, Angela Wairimu Kuria, sued her former employer, Safaricom PLC, alleging constructive dismissal. She claimed she was discriminated against, bullied and frustrated at work, and that her complaints to management were ignored, compelling her to resign in November 2017. She sought a declaration that she was unlawfully dismissed, one month's salary in lieu of notice, maximum compensation, and costs. The Respondent admitted the employment relationship but maintained that the Claimant resigned voluntarily without disclosing any reason, that all terminal dues were paid, and that her complaints were addressed, noting she had failed to escalate grievances under the Grievance Handling Policy. The court framed two issues: whether constructive dismissal was proved, and whether remedies were due. Relying on the principles in Coca Cola East & Central Africa Limited v Maria Kagai Ligaga and Stella W. Muraguri v Edward Kamau Muriu & 4 others, the court applied an objective test and found no repudiatory breach creating an intolerable work environment. The Claimant resigned because a grievance process did not go her way and did not exhaust the available escalation mechanism. Her claims for notice pay and compensation were disallowed, and the entire suit was dismissed with each party bearing their own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Claimant proved constructive dismissal

Holding

The Claimant failed to prove constructive dismissal; her resignation stemmed from an unfavourable grievance outcome and she did not exhaust the grievance escalation process.

Reasoning

Applying the Coca Cola East & Central Africa Ltd v Maria Kagai Ligaga principles, the court held that the employer's conduct did not create an intolerable work environment. The Claimant resigned because a grievance resolution process did not go her way, and she failed to escalate her grievances in accordance with the Grievance Handling Policy and Procedure. Resigning to get out of a difficult situation does not meet the threshold for constructive dismissal.

p. 4
02

Whether the Claimant was entitled to notice pay and compensation

Holding

The remedies of notice pay and compensation were disallowed as the claim of constructive dismissal failed.

Reasoning

Since the foundational claim of constructive dismissal was not established, the derivative remedies of notice pay and maximum compensation had no basis. The entire claim was dismissed with no order as to costs, each party bearing their own.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Not every involuntary resignation amounts to constructive dismissal; there must be a direct causal link with intolerable employer conduct.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Claimant's entire claim fails and is dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to bear their own costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kuria v Safaricom Public Limited Company (Cause 977 of 2018) [2025] KEELRC 2281 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Memorandum of Claim dated 25th May 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2281/eng@2025-07-31

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