Onyango v Ekaterra Tea Kenya PLC (Cause E011 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2389 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenyan employers cannot retire workers on medical grounds without proof of incapacity, an independent process, and a fair hearing—or pay the price.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Claimant's contract was terminated by the Respondent on medical ground, fairly and lawfully or at all
- 2.Whether the Claimant merits the remedies sought
Key legal issues
#Whether retirement on medical ground was fair and lawful
Termination was unfair and unlawful under Sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act; no valid reason or hearing was established
The Respondent relied on its own medical board's recommendation but produced no evidence of any discussion or hearing with the Claimant after that recommendation. The board's report did not establish incapacity, since the Claimant had managed the condition for 8 of her 11 years of service. She was not offered a chance to obtain an independent medical opinion or shown to have consented.
Whether anticipatory salaries to retirement age are recoverable
Refused; only 11 months' salary compensation granted
The contract did not guarantee service until mandatory retirement and had provisions for premature exit. Given the Claimant's health and age of 40, an expectation of 15 more years was speculative. The Court instead awarded the equivalent of 11 months' salary as compensation for the unfair termination.
Entitlement to terminal dues
Notice pay, gratuity per CBA clause 32(b), pro-rata leave and bus fare granted as offered
The Court found these dues had been offered by the Respondent in the retirement letter and were due under the CBA, awarding Kshs. 46,492 notice, Kshs. 228,595 gratuity, Kshs. 18,783 leave pay and Kshs. 2,000 bus fare, less the Kshs. 174,180 already received.
Legal principles established
#- Termination on medical ground requires medical investigation, establishment of incapacity and a fair hearing
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that termination of the Claimant's contract on medical ground was unfair and unlawful
- 2.Respondent to pay the Claimant notice, gratuity, compensation, leave and bus fare totalling Kshs. 554,282, less Kshs. 174,180 already received - Kshs. 380,102
- 3.Certificate of Service to issue
- 4.Costs to the Claimant
- 5.Interest at court rate from the date of Judgment until payment in full
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act and E&LRC (Procedure) Rules, 2024
Relief refused
#20 years' lost earnings (anticipatory salaries to retirement age) of Kshs. 5,638,228
Not a reasonable expectation given health challenges; contract had provision for premature exit; amounts to unjust enrichment
Excess amount beyond net award
Terminal dues already received of Kshs. 174,180 deducted from total award
Costs
Costs to the Claimant.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Termination of the Claimant’s contract on medical ground was unfair and unlawful.
The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant notice, gratuity, compensation, leave and bus fare adding at -Kshs. 554, 282, less Kshs. 174,180 – total at Kshs.380,102.
Termination on such ground must be preceded by medical investigation. Incapacity must be established. The Employee must be accorded a fair hearing.
There is no record of such discussions, or any form of hearing, where the recommendations of the board were discussed, prior to retirement.
Issues in the judgment
#Prayer for 2 months' salary in notice pleads Kshs. 46,492 which does not match twice the stated monthly salary of Kshs. 23,492 (which would be Kshs. 46,984); the Court nonetheless awarded Kshs. 46,492
Claimant's pleading of age 37 at termination conflicts with her own submissions and ID (born 1982, age 40)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Onyango v Ekaterra Tea Kenya PLC (Cause E011 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2389 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELRC Cause (Kericho). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2389/eng@2025-08-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.