Muriithi v MAF Carrefour Retail Limited Kenya (Cause E532 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 3007 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled Carrefour constructively dismissed an injured employee by ignoring a doctor's advice to give her lighter duties, awarding six months' salary.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the claimant was constructively dismissed
Yes - the court found constructive dismissal arising from the respondent's failure to place the claimant on lighter duties as recommended by Dr. Litunya.
The court accepted Dr. Litunya's report as that of a designated OSH practitioner and found no merit in the claimant's complaint against it. The report recommended exemption from heavy lifting. Cross-examination of RW1 confirmed the respondent never adjusted the claimant's duties. The court held that any reasonable employer would have placed her on lighter duties after the persistent complaints, and that this failure contributed to the resignation, making the employer's conduct an effective cause of the termination.
Whether the complaint against Dr. Litunya's medical report had merit
No - the report was upheld; the claimant, a layperson, had no authority to question the doctor's professional findings.
The email complained of the report was written after resignation, outside the employment relationship. On the merits, Dr. Litunya was a designated health practitioner approved by DOSH, and the claimant herself held certificates of fitness issued by him. The court found the medical conclusions were terms on which the claimant, a layperson, could not opine, and found no prima facie merit in the complaint.
Whether the claimant proved the unrefunded medical costs of Kshs. 5,000/-
No - the claim failed for want of proof of special damages.
The respondent asserted it reimbursed the claimant's medical expenses, and the claimant did not point the court to any specific payment she alleged was not refunded. Special damages must be specifically pleaded and proved, and no proof was tendered, so the claim of Kshs. 5,000/- failed.
Quantum of compensation for constructive dismissal
Six months' salary awarded, considering the section 49(4) factors.
The court applied the Supreme Court's Kenfreight decision and the Court of Appeal's Kiambaa Dairy Farmers principles that the 12-month maximum is reserved for egregious cases. It weighed the respondent's support - medical care, paid sick leave, settled bills - against the claimant's own failure to visit Kijabe Hospital as recommended, and the single lapse of failing to assign light duties, to arrive at six months.
Legal principles established
#- Constructive dismissal requires proof of a repudiatory breach of fundamental terms of the employment contract, an objective test of the employer's conduct, causation, termination within reasonable time, and the burden lies on the employee.
- A key factor in constructive dismissal is that the employer's conduct must be an effective cause of the termination; the employee may leave with or without notice.
- Compensatory damages for unfair dismissal are not mandatory or automatic and are assessed within the range of zero to twelve months under section 49(4) of the Employment Act.
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the claimant against the respondent for the equivalent of 6 months' salary, being Kshs. 32,280 x 6, total Kshs. 193,680
- 2.Costs of the suit awarded to the claimant with interest at court rate from the date of judgment
- 3.Stay of 30 days granted
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Jurisdiction under the Employment Act limited by the court's ruling of 18 November 2024 excluding Work Injuries Benefits Act claims, which were referred to the Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Muriithi v MAF Carrefour Retail Limited Kenya (Cause E532 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 3007 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment (amended memorandum of claim dated 19 March 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/3007/eng@2025-10-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.