Muthoga v Devkan Enterprises (Cause E935 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2589 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employer that fires an employee without written charges and a hearing, and shows up to court with no evidence, will lose and pay heavily.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Procedural fairness of the dismissal
The dismissal was unprocedural as the Claimant was not given charges in writing or a hearing.
Section 41 of the Employment Act requires the employer to explain the reasons for termination and hear the employee. The court found no evidence of a show cause letter or hearing; the alleged text message was not produced. Relying on Chitavi, the employer must inform the employee of charges, allow preparation and a hearing, and consider representations before dismissal. The Respondent failed the procedural fairness test.
Substantive justification for the dismissal
The Respondent failed to prove a valid and fair reason; the dismissal was substantively unfair.
The Respondent alleged abscondment, but led no evidence. The Claimant testified she extended an approved leave with the employer's knowledge. With no controverting evidence, the employer failed to discharge the Section 43 burden of proving the reason for termination, so the termination is deemed unfair.
Compensation quantum
Nine months' salary awarded instead of the 12 months sought.
Compensation under Section 49 is capped at 12 months and guided by 13 factors. The Claimant's own admission that she unilaterally extended her leave without the employer's proof of consent amounted to contributory conduct, justifying a reduction from the maximum to nine months.
Motor vehicle claim
Claim for the vehicle or refund of Kshs.465,000 failed for want of a purchase agreement.
Although monthly deductions of Kshs.15,000 were made, the court found no express agreement on purchase of the vehicle and considered the payments related to the vehicle's utility in the course of employment rather than a purchase price. The claim therefore failed.
Legal principles established
#- Under Section 41 of the Employment Act an employer must, before terminating on grounds of misconduct, explain the reasons to the employee and afford the employee an opportunity to be heard with a representative present.
- Where the employer leads no evidence, it fails to discharge the burden under Section 43 of proving valid reasons for termination, rendering the dismissal unfair.
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that the Claimant's dismissal was wrongful.
- 2.An award of one (1) month salary in lieu of notice at Kshs. 142,948/-
- 3.An award of Nine (9) months salary as compensation for the unfair termination at Kshs.1,286,532/-
- 4.Unpaid salaries from October 2022 to September, 2023 at Kshs.1,530,376/-
- 5.Unremitted Stima Sacco savings of Kshs.1500/-
- 6.Unremitted GS Life Insurance contributions at Kshs.162,645
- 7.That the Claimant be issued with a certificate of service within 14 days of this judgment.
- 8.Costs.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original employment and labour relations jurisdiction under Article 162(2) of the Constitution (court not expressly stated in the extract)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Muthoga v Devkan Enterprises (Cause E935 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2589 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2589/eng@2025-09-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.