Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedCause No. 376 of 2016· [2026] KEELRC 2616 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Domestic Hotels, Educational Institution and Hospital v Sandton Palace Hotel Limited

Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya at Nairobi
29 September 2026
2,176 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled a hotel's redundancy unlawful because it skipped mandatory notification steps, awarding the affected worker compensation and leave pay.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Kenya Union of Domestic Hotels, Educational Institution and Hospital sued Sandton Palace Hotel Limited on behalf of grievant Vincent Chore Ogutu, a Food and Beverage Supervisor whose employment was terminated on account of redundancy on 21st January 2014, claiming wrongful and un-procedural redundancy and seeking reinstatement or, in the alternative, Kshs. 538,266.67. The Respondent admitted the redundancy but asserted full compliance with the law and payment of all dues, and challenged the union's locus standi on the basis that the CBA had expired. The court held the CBA remained in force under clause 28 and sections 59(2) and (3) of the Labour Relations Act, so the union had capacity to sue. RW1 admitted no prior notification of the redundancy was given to the union or labour officer, breaching the mandatory procedure in section 40 of the Employment Act and clause 11 of the CBA, rendering the termination unfair and unlawful under section 45. Reinstatement was refused as barred by section 12(2)(vii) of the ELRC Act, the separation having occurred over three years earlier. The court awarded four months' gross salary (Kshs. 88,000.00) as compensation and leave pay of Kshs. 19,066.66, totalling Kshs. 107,066.66, with costs and interest from the date of judgment, subject to statutory deductions. Claims for notice pay, severance pay, January 2014 salary and 224 off days were declined for lack of rebuttal, proof of payment, or particulars.

Key legal issues

#
01

Locus standi of the union to sue for the grievant

Holding

The Claimant had legal capacity to represent the grievant because the CBA remained in force by virtue of clause 28 and section 59(2) and (3) of the Labour Relations Act

Reasoning

The Respondent argued the CBA had expired in November 2013 before the January 2014 redundancy. RW1 admitted clause 28 provided the CBA would remain in force until replaced or amended, and no documentary proof of termination of the CBA was produced. Section 59(2) and (3) of the Labour Relations Act keeps a collective agreement binding and incorporates its terms into individual contracts of employment.

p. 8
02

Whether the redundancy was wrongful and unlawful

Holding

The redundancy was unfair and unlawful because the Respondent failed to comply with the mandatory procedure in section 40 of the Employment Act and clause 11 of the CBA

Reasoning

RW1 admitted the grievant was merely given a termination letter without prior notification to the union or labour officer as required by section 40(1)(a) of the Employment Act. Redundancy is termination for no fault of the employee, requiring fairness and dignity. Non-compliance with the mandatory procedure rendered the termination unfair and unlawful within section 45 of the Employment Act.

p. 10
03

Reliefs merited

Holding

Reinstatement unavailable; compensation of four months' gross salary (Kshs. 88,000.00) and leave pay of Kshs. 19,066.66 awarded; notice pay, severance pay, January 2014 salary and off days declined

Reasoning

Reinstatement was barred by section 12(2)(vii) of the ELRC Act as the separation occurred over three years earlier. Considering over four years of service and absence of misconduct, four months' gross salary was awarded as compensation under section 49(1) of the Employment Act. Leave for 2013/2014 was allowed as the Respondent failed to prove it was taken; other heads were proved paid or lacked particulars.

p. 12

Legal principles established

#
  • A collective agreement continues to bind the parties and its terms are incorporated into individual employment contracts until amended or replaced, per section 59(2) and (3) of the Labour Relations Act
  • Redundancy is lawful only if the employer strictly complies with section 40 of the Employment Act, including one month's prior notification to the union and the labour officer
  • Failure to follow the mandatory redundancy procedure renders the termination unfair and unlawful under section 45 of the Employment Act

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Compensation of Kshs. 88,000.00 for unlawful termination
  2. 2.Leave pay of Kshs. 19,066.66 (26 days)
  3. 3.Total award of Kshs. 107,066.66 against the Respondent
  4. 4.Costs and interest at court rates from the date of judgment
  5. 5.The award of damages is subject to statutory deductions
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2)(a) of the Constitution read with the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (ELRC Act, section 12)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Domestic Hotels, Educational Institution and Hospital v Sandton Palace Hotel Limited", Case Analysis (2026). Cause No. 376 of 2016. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2616/eng@2026-09-29

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