Eurocity Hospital doctor in Kisumu cited for sexual harassment, ordered to pay Sh2.4million to female ex-staffer
Judge dismisses respondents' assertion she failed to prove constructive dismissal, emphasising that she had voluntarily resigned by issuing a seven-day notice, citing personal reasons, and not due to any actions instigated by them.

A Kisumu hospital and one of its top executives have been ordered to pay one of its former employees, who left her job due to sexual harassment by one of her seniors, in excess of Sh2.4million for wrongful dismissal from employment.
Eurocity Hospital Kisumu and Dr A.O who were listed in the suit as the first and second respondents, respectively, in a case filed by MM, a previous court citation that indicated the plaintiff as Magdalene Muendo listed thereof as the claimant, who sought damages for what she referred to as “constructive dismissal.”
“In this case, there is evidence indicative of sexual harassment of a kind that is deeply disturbing. The 2nd Respondent knew the Claimant was owed money by the 1st Respondent and even went as far as indicate he would make arrangements for payment of her dues before, they had sexual intercourse. The Claimant had expectation that her unpaid salary would be paid. This is what one would expect once the employee renders services to the employer. Instead she was asked to engage in sexual intercourse with AO in order to have her money paid.” Justice Nzioki wa Makau of the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu High Court ruled in a judgement dated January 21, 2025.
According to evidence presented in court by the complainant, Dr. A.O made overtures that are explicit and openly graphic coupled by promises if only the aggrieved staff member agreed to his advances.
MM moved to court on January 30, 2024 after she was forced to resign due to frustration caused by sexual harassment by Dr AO, which made the working environment unconducive, and the withholding of her salary. In her claim, she sought two months of salary arrears, damages for unlawful dismissal, and pay in lieu of notice.
She submitted as evidence recordings of an explicit conversation between her and Dr AO in which he makes sexual advances in return for financial and other favours.
The phone recordings were admitted as evidence on May 20, 2024 after Justice Stephen Radido dismissed a challenge by the respondents that they were not audible and that there was no evidence that the phone/computer from which they were extracted was in good and working condition.
Earlier, in their response dated March 4, 2024, the respondents also denied the allegation of constructive dismissal, asserting that the claimant had voluntarily resigned. They also maintained that they did not owe her any terminal benefits. The matter proceeded for hearing on various dates.
They held that MM had failed to prove constructive dismissal, emphasising that she had voluntarily resigned by issuing a seven-day notice, citing personal reasons, and not due to any actions instigated by them.
In relation to her allegations of sexual harassment, the respondents claimed that she had not established a prima facie case in accordance with section 47(5) of the Employment Act.
“The Respondents also contend that the Claimant did not raise any complaints of sexual harassment at the earliest opportunity or at any point during her employment, despite the seriousness of the accusations. They argue that this failure points to the possibility that the allegations may have been fabricated for her own benefit,” noted Justice Nzioki wa Makau of the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu.
In his ruling delivered on January 21, Justice Wa Makau , however, ruled that after consideration of the pleadings and submissions of parties together with the evidence, she found the respondents guilty of the charges.
He cited the Black’s Law Dictionary (10th Edition), which defines constructive dismissal as “an employer’s creation of working conditions that leave a particular employee or group of employees little or no choice but to resign, as by fundamentally changing the working conditions or terms of employment; an employer’s course of action that, being detrimental to an employee, leaves the employee almost no option but to quit.”
Justice Wa Makau ordered the the respondents to pay the claimant Sh 200,000 being two month’s unpaid wages, Ksh 100,000 as notice pay, and Ksh 1.5 million as damages for the sexual harassment.
The court also ordered that MM gets Sh,600,000 as a six-month compensation in terms of section 49 of the Employment Act for the wrongful termination. The respondents were also ordered to meet the costs of the suit.
Efforts to get a comment from the hospital management on whether it has a policy on sexual harassment and steps taken since the ruling was made were not successful.
Our inquiries in form of phone calls, WhatsApp messages and emails were not answered by the time of going to press.