The Court of Appeal held that an employee who signs a full‑and‑final settlement agreement is generally barred from making additional claims arising from the same dispute, unless a legally recognised vitiating factor is proven.

A three‑judge bench described a properly signed final agreement as a binding contract that estops the employee from raising further claims, except where fraud, duress, coercion or misrepresentation can be demonstrated.

The judgment clarified that the burden of proof lies with the employee to show a recognised reason such as duress, fraud, coercion or misrepresentation; without such proof, the settlement extinguishes all existing and future statutory and contractual claims.

The ruling arose from a case where a long‑serving employee, employed for over twenty years, received Ksh6,957,625 in terminal dues after her position was declared redundant in 2019 and signed a discharge certificate confirming no further claims.

The employee later contested the redundancy process, alleging non‑compliance with the Employment Act, but the Court of Appeal dismissed the challenge because the signed settlement was deemed valid and the employee had not proved any vitiating factor at the time of signing.

The judges also rejected the argument that mere lack of bargaining power or financial pressure after job loss automatically constitutes duress, emphasizing that specific evidence of coercion or misrepresentation is required.