The court reviewed an appeal against a trial court's award of Kshs.5,700,000 housing allowance to a Deputy Governor who claimed entitlement under SRC circulars. The Appellant argued the Respondent's salary (Kshs.621,250) included housing allowance per Gazette Notice 6518, but the court held SRC circulars on housing benefits were legally binding, requiring the Appellant to provide housing or rent payment. The court found the Appellant failed to provide housing, so the Respondent was entitled to Kshs.90,000 monthly rent for 60 months, totaling Kshs.5,700,000.

salaries and remuneration commissionhousing allowancegazette noticedeputy governor11 min read

JudgmentJoyce Wanjiru Baru VS Justus Kiara13 August 2025

Joyce Wanjiru Baru VS Justus Kiara

Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri ELRCOnesmus Makau

Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtAppeals

The court set aside the trial court's finding that the respondent was unfairly terminated, ruling that the respondent failed to prove he was dismissed by the appellant via phone call on 28th August 2023. The court found that the respondent did not discharge the burden of proof under section 107 of the Evidence Act to demonstrate termination by the appellant, and instead, he stopped attending work without prior notice. The court substituted the finding that the respondent voluntarily left his job, thereby setting aside the awards of 12 months' salary compensation and one month's salary in lieu of notice.

unfair terminationemployment lawevidence actburden of proof12 min read

JudgmentAegis Construction Limited VS Richard Maina Kihenja12 August 2025

Aegis Construction Limited VS Richard Maina Kihenja

Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri ELRCOnesmus Makau

Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtAppeals

The appellant appealed against the lower court's decision regarding the unlawful termination of the respondent's employment. The appellant challenged the trial court's findings on multiple grounds, including the misdirection on the claimant's termination, the failure to apply Section 30 of the Employment Act, 2007, and the erroneous conclusion that the respondent was not required to present a certificate of incapacity. The court found that the respondent's employment was terminated by the appellant without proper procedure, as the appellant did not serve a show cause notice or conduct a disciplinary hearing, and the respondent was not given a fair opportunity to defend himself. The court upheld the trial court's decision that the termination was unfair and unlawful, emphasizing the need for fair procedures under the Employment Act.

employment act, 2007unfair terminationcertificate of incapacitytermination by operation of law14 min read

JudgmentKENYA UNION OF CLINICAL OFFICERS VS KIRINYAGA COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF KENYA AND 1 Others12 August 2025

KENYA UNION OF CLINICAL OFFICERS VS KIRINYAGA COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF KENYA AND 1 Others

Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri ELRCOnesmus Makau

Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtMiscellaneous Applications

The court upheld the respondent’s preliminary objection to the applicant’s motion for contempt proceedings, ruling that the motion was procedurally defective because it sought to punish public officials for contempt of court without first obtaining judicial review proceedings and an order of mandamus to compel compliance with the court decree. The court held that contempt proceedings against public officers for failure to comply with court orders require prior judicial review and mandamus to establish the officials’ duty to act, as per the precedent in Republic v The Attorney General & Another Exparte James Alfred Koroso (2013) eKLR. The motion was struck with costs for failing to follow the correct procedural steps under the Government Proceedings Act 2022 and Civil Procedure Rules 2010.

contempt of courtjudicial revieworder of mandamusgovernment proceedings act 20223 min read

JudgmentRiva Petroleum Dealers Limted VS Anthony Wanjohi Ndumia12 August 2025

Riva Petroleum Dealers Limted VS Anthony Wanjohi Ndumia

Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri ELRCOnesmus Makau

Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtAppeals

The court quashed the lower court's ruling on the appeal, finding that the appellant erred by failing to properly challenge the leave to file suit out of time under section 90 of the Employment Act. The trial court incorrectly held that it could not sit on appeal over a fellow magistrate's leave order, but the court determined that the appellant could raise a preliminary objection to the time-barred suit during trial proceedings, as leave to file suit out of time is not a final order and can be challenged during the trial. The court ruled that the trial court erred in allowing the suit to proceed without addressing the time-barred issue during trial, and the appeal was allowed with the statement of claim struck out.

employment actlimitation periodpreliminary objectionleave to file suit8 min read

JudgmentAmos Mwangi Njoroge VS China Far East Construction Company Limited29 July 2025

Amos Mwangi Njoroge VS China Far East Construction Company Limited

Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri ELRCOnesmus Makau

Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtAppeals

The court dismissed the appellants' appeals against the trial court's finding that they failed to prove an employment relationship with the respondent. The appellants alleged unlawful termination of employment by the respondent between July 2018 and 2020, but they did not produce written contracts or witnesses to support their claims. The trial court found that the appellants did not prove their employment relationship under section 107 of the Evidence Act, as they only submitted demand letters and no evidence of salary payments. The court upheld the dismissal with costs, noting the appellants failed to meet the burden of proof for employment and termination claims.

employment relationshipunlawful terminationevidence actbalance of probabilities7 min read

JudgmentLeonard Magira Muchiri VS China Far East Construction Company Limited29 July 2025

Leonard Magira Muchiri VS China Far East Construction Company Limited

Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri ELRCOnesmus Makau

Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtAppeals

The court dismissed the appellants' appeals, finding that they failed to prove an employment relationship with the respondent as alleged. The appellants did not provide sufficient evidence, such as written contracts or bank statements, to demonstrate they were employed by the respondent. The trial court concluded that the appellants did not meet the burden of proof under section 107 of the Evidence Act, and the appeals were dismissed with costs.

employment relationshipunlawful terminationburden of proofevidence act7 min read

JudgmentMoses Murithi Ndaguri VS China Far East Construction Company Limited29 July 2025

Moses Murithi Ndaguri VS China Far East Construction Company Limited

Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri ELRCOnesmus Makau

Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtAppeals

The court dismissed the appellants' appeals, finding that they failed to prove they were employed by the respondent as alleged. The appellants did not provide sufficient evidence, such as written contracts or bank statements, to establish the employment relationship despite alleging oral contracts and payment of salaries. The respondent's witness denied the employment relationship and admitted that the appellants were casual employees not employed for more than three months. The court held that the appellants did not meet the burden of proof under section 107 of the Evidence Act, which requires proving facts on a balance of probabilities.

employment relationshipevidence actunlawful terminationburden of proof7 min read

JudgmentStephen Kiogora Guantai VS China Far East Construction Company Limited29 July 2025

Stephen Kiogora Guantai VS China Far East Construction Company Limited

Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri ELRCOnesmus Makau

Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtAppeals

The court dismissed the appellants' appeals, finding that they failed to prove an employment relationship with the respondent as alleged. The appellants did not produce sufficient evidence, such as written contracts or bank statements, to establish that they were employed by the respondent. The trial court concluded that the appellants did not meet the burden of proof under section 107 of the Evidence Act, which requires proving facts on a balance of probabilities. The court emphasized that the appellants only produced demand letters and no other documentary evidence, and their witnesses did not corroborate the employment relationship.

employment relationshipevidence actunlawful terminationburden of proof7 min read