Kamau v Copycat Limited (Cause E759 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2330 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that COVID-era pay cuts, unpaid leave, and a rushed redundancy were unlawful, awarding the employee over Kshs 1.1 million.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Lawfulness of the 20% salary cut
The salary deduction was unlawful as it was not requested by the employee but made for the employer's benefit; refund ordered.
Section 19(1)(g) of the Employment Act allows only consensual deductions requested in writing by the employee where the employer has no beneficial interest. The letter signed by the Claimant did not state she requested the deduction; the deduction was made to sustain the employer's business. Having no real alternative but to sign, the Claimant is entitled to a refund of the 20% deducted.
Validity and fairness of the redundancy
Redundancy had substantive justification but was procedurally flawed: notice to the labour officer was given on 27/8/2020 for termination effected 4/9/2020, far less than one month, and no objective selection process involving the Claimant was shown. Termination was unlawful and unfair.
Section 40(1)(a) requires not less than one month's notice to the labour officer and the employee before termination on account of redundancy. The notice of 27/8/2020 preceded the 4/9/2020 termination by only days. Payment in lieu of notice cannot substitute the one-month notification, whose purpose is to prepare and enable consultation. The Respondent also failed to prove an objective selection process under section 40(1)(c), rendering the termination unlawful and unfair contrary to sections 36, 40, 41 and 45.
Compulsory unpaid leave
The three-month compulsory unpaid leave was unwarranted as the Respondent produced no financial statements to justify it; salaries for July–September 2020 awarded.
The Respondent's witness conceded there were no financial statements before court to demonstrate financial distress, only memos. The uncontroverted evidence of the Claimant therefore proved the compulsory unpaid leave was unjustified, and the court awarded the full three months' salaries and allowances of Kshs. 426,000.00.
Legal principles established
#- A unilateral salary reduction/deduction is lawful only if requested in writing by the employee and not for the employer's benefit.
- The one month notice of intended redundancy under section 40(1)(a) is mandatory and cannot be cured by an offer of payment in lieu of notice.
- An employer must demonstrate the selection process under section 40(1)(c) involved the affected employee objectively.
- A party who fails to call evidence in support of its case leaves pleadings as unsubstantiated statements and the other side's evidence uncontroverted.
Court orders
#- 1.Salary cut refund for April, May and June 2020 in the sum of Kshs. 138,000.00
- 2.Kshs. 426,000.00 for unpaid salary during compulsory leave period in July, August and September 2020
- 3.Kshs. 142,000.00 in lieu of one-month notice
- 4.Kshs. 142,000.00 being service pay
- 5.Kshs. 426,000.00 being compensation equivalent to 3 months' salary for the unlawful and unfair termination
- 6.Interest at court rates from date of judgment till payment in full
- 7.Costs of the suit to the Claimant
- 8.Grant of certificate of service within 30 days of the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 (Employment and Labour Relations Court)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kamau v Copycat Limited (Cause E759 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2330 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Cause No E759 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2330/eng@2025-07-31
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.