The Employment and Labour Relations Court has ordered Savannah Brands Company Limited to pay former Trade Marketing Manager Christine Nduta Mbugua Sh1.59 million after finding that the company unfairly terminated her employment while she was still serving her three-month probationary period without giving her a disciplinary hearing.
Justice Hellen Wasilwa awarded Mbugua Sh1,592,215, comprising seven months’ salary as compensation for unfair termination and seven days’ salary in lieu of notice, less statutory deductions. The court also ordered the company to pay the costs of the suit and interest at court rates from the date of judgment.
In a judgment delivered on Monday, October 12, 2026, the court found that Savannah Brands terminated Mbugua’s employment on May 7, 2024, barely two months after she joined the company, citing poor performance.
Mbugua had been employed on March 4, 2024, as a Trade Marketing Manager under a contract that provided for a three-month probationary period. She earned a gross monthly salary of Sh220,122, comprising a basic salary of Sh150,000, a car allowance of Sh67,122 and an airtime allowance of Sh3,000. She challenged her termination, arguing that she had been invited to a performance review meeting on May 7, 2024, but was instead served with a termination letter without a proper assessment or an opportunity to respond to the allegations against her.
Mbugua maintained that her performance was supposed to be formally assessed at the end of her 90-day probationary period and that the company had not given her sufficient time to demonstrate her capabilities against the targets set by her supervisor. She further told the court that on May 8, 2024, her supervisor informed the organisation that she had resigned, despite her position that her employment had been terminated. She protested the decision in a letter dated May 11, 2024.
Savannah Brands opposed the claim, maintaining that Mbugua’s performance had been reviewed periodically and that shortcomings in her delivery justified the termination of her probationary contract. The company cited gaps in meeting sales targets, trade execution and financial management, including a missed accrual of more than Sh700,000 in promotion financial tracking. It argued that Mbugua had been informed of the expectations and had failed to meet the required standards.
The company further maintained that her contract allowed termination during probation and that she had received her terminal dues, including seven days’ salary in lieu of notice.
However, during cross-examination, the company’s Human Resource Manager, Joyce Kamau, admitted that there was no formal performance review report or record of the meeting scheduled for May 7, 2024. She also confirmed that no notice to show cause had been issued and no disciplinary hearing had been conducted before the termination.
Kamau, who joined the company in February 2025, testified that she had not personally conducted any appraisal of Mbugua’s performance. She also confirmed that the company had no formal assessment report documenting the alleged shortcomings.
In determining the dispute, Justice Wasilwa held that employees serving under probationary contracts are entitled to procedural fairness before their employment is terminated. The judge noted that Section 42 of the Employment Act, which excludes employees on probation from certain protections under Section 41, had been declared unconstitutional to the extent that it denied them the fair labour practices and fair administrative action guaranteed under Articles 41 and 47 of the Constitution.
“Whereas section 42 remain in the text of the Employment Act 2007, no employer can terminate an employee even if on probation without following due process,” the judge held.
The court found that Savannah Brands had terminated Mbugua’s employment without a hearing and without establishing that she had failed to perform to the required standards. Justice Wasilwa consequently found the termination unfair and unjustified under Section 45 of the Employment Act, awarding Mbugua seven months’ salary as compensation in addition to notice pay.
The company was also ordered to pay the costs of the suit, with interest at court rates from October 12, 2026.
