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 the judgment extract· [2025] KEELRC 3740 (KLR)

Ngugi v University of Nairobi (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E282 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 3740 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
19 November 2025
DMD. K. Njagi Marete
599 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

#

Kenya's Employment Court confirmed a CBA cannot be applied retrospectively to compute gratuity unless the parties clearly intended it.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Appellant appealed by Memorandum of Appeal dated 30th September 2024 against the trial court's dismissal of her claim for gratuity. Her grounds were that the trial court erred in treating the express term of the CBA as retrospective, in holding that two CBAs could operate in computing gratuity, and in failing to find that the CBA in force at her promotion on 23rd August 2016 (the 2013-2017 CBA) governed the computation. She sought setting aside of the judgment and entry of judgment per her claim of 19th August 2019. The Respondent, noting she had worked twenty-five years since 1989, opposed, submitting the CBA of 24th February 2016 could not apply retrospectively, relying on Municipality of Mombasa v Nyali Limited, Samuel Kamau Macharia and Keroche Industries for the rule that retrospective operation requires clear contractual intention. The Appellant countered that a CBA is a progressive document incorporated into individual contracts on registration, relying on a communique dated 20th March 2019 and the gratuity clauses of the CBA effective 1st July 2015. The court held the Appellant's submissions did not answer the applicability issue; partial application of the two CBAs in the gratuity computation was the viable and legitimate approach, since applying the later CBA would be retrospective and occasion injustice. The appeal was dismissed with each party bearing its own costs. Delivered 19th November 2025 by D. K. Njagi Marete, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Retrospective application of a CBA to gratuity computation

Holding

Two CBAs may partially operate in computing gratuity; applying the later CBA would be a retrospective application occasioning injustice

Reasoning

The court reasoned that a CBA is not applied retrospectively absent express intention of the parties. Since the Appellant's promotion/cause of action arose before the later CBA, computing gratuity under it would be retrospective. Partial application of the two CBAs was held the viable and legitimate approach, so the trial court's finding stood.

p. 2
02

Adequacy of the Appellant's proof on appeal

Holding

The Appellant failed to demonstrate that the trial court erred in finding she had not proved her case

Reasoning

The court found the Appellant's submissions did not answer the central question of which CBA governed gratuity computation. Without resolving that issue, the appeal could not succeed, and the trial court's assessment of evidence was not disturbed.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A CBA cannot be applied retrospectively to compute contractual benefits unless the parties clearly intended such application

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal is dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to bear their own costs of the appeal
On appeal from
trial court (lower court, not named in judgment)
not stated in judgment
Jurisdiction invoked
First appellate jurisdiction over the trial court's decision (specific provision not cited in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ngugi v University of Nairobi (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E282 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 3740 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment extract. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/3740/eng@2025-11-19

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