Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in judgment· [2025] KEELRC 2298 (KLR)

Sasai & 8 others v Narok County Government & another (Cause E050 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2298 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
31 July 2025
JRJames Rika
420 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court dismissed a Kshs. 3 million gratuity claim because the employee's contract had no gratuity clause and she produced no supporting documents.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a first-instance ruling of the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru (James Rika, Judge) on the severed claim of the 2nd Claimant. In a judgment of 28th February 2025, the Court awarded gratuity of Kshs. 4,511,430 to all Claimants except the 2nd Claimant, granting her leave to formally prove her case separately because her contract of employment differed from those of her co-claimants. She testified on 1st July 2025 that she was employed as County Secretary at a monthly salary of Kshs. 281,250, worked five years from 12th September 2018 to 11th September 2023, and that gratuity at 31% of her monthly basic salary totalled Kshs. 5,231,250, of which Kshs. 2,232,279 was paid, leaving a balance of Kshs. 2,998,971 claimed. The Court found that her appointment letter dated 13th September 2018 contained no gratuity clause, unlike the express gratuity clauses in the other Claimants' contracts, and that the February 2025 judgment had already highlighted this omission. She exhibited only her appointment letter, ID card, sample pay slips, oath letter and certificate of service, and produced no documents evidencing payment or the balance claimed. The Court held she failed to formally prove her claim, declined it, and made no order on costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the 2nd Claimant proved her entitlement to gratuity

Holding

The claim failed because the 2nd Claimant did not produce a contract containing a gratuity clause, unlike her co-claimants, and produced no documents on payment or the balance claimed

Reasoning

The Court noted that the 2nd Claimant's appointment letter dated 13th September 2018 contained no clause on gratuity, and that the earlier judgment of 28th February 2025 had already flagged the absence of the gratuity contract. Even after being granted leave to prove her case separately, she exhibited only her appointment letter, ID card, pay slips, oath letter and certificate of service - none establishing gratuity entitlement. She likewise produced no documents evidencing the payments received or the balance claimed. The Court therefore held the claim unproved.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A claimant who alleges entitlement to gratuity must place before the Court the contract or document establishing that entitlement; absence of such proof is fatal to the claim

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The 2nd Claimant's Claim is declined
  2. 2.No order on the costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and labour relations jurisdiction (original claim; specific provision not stated in judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Sasai & 8 others v Narok County Government & another (Cause E050 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2298 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2298/eng@2025-07-31

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