Cleanshelf Supermarket has been ordered to pay Ksh500,000 in nominal damages after the High Court ruled that the retailer violated a customer’s constitutional rights during a shoplifting accusation.
The ruling, delivered on October 31, 2025, came from a petition filed by Evelyn Kagwiria Anampiu, who alleged that she was subjected to a public physical search of her body and belongings, which was “horrendous and humiliating” at the supermarket’s Ruaka branch on June 3, 2023.
No items were found during the search.
In her petition, Anampiu argued that the supermarket’s actions violated her rights under Articles 28, 31, and 46 of the Constitution, which protect human dignity, privacy, and consumer rights.
Woman Sues CleanShelf Supermarket
She claimed the incident left her living with the stigma of being labeled a shoplifter and demanded Ksh4 million in damages.
“It is the Petitioner’s case that she was subjected to a public physical search which was humiliating. She averred that she now lives with the stigma of being labelled a shop lifter,” read part of the court documents.
Also Read: TSC Pressured to Confirm 20,000 Teachers as Permanent and Pensionable
The supermarket, represented by Assistant Manager Olive Wanjiku, defended the search, stating that it was part of a routine procedure conducted in accordance with the Subcontracting Company’s Loss Control Procedures.
Wanjiku told the court that the petitioner became “aggressive, hostile, and loud in her tone” during the interaction, drawing attention from bystanders.
She insisted that the supermarket had acted reasonably to preserve its property and denied any intent to humiliate the customer.
Court Ruling on the Matter
The court, however, found that Cleanshelf did not follow its own policies.
According to the supermarket’s Loss Control Policy, searches should be conducted “in a private area before the payment point and in the presence of a managerial staff.”
The ruling noted that the petitioner was searched in a public area, contrary to their policy, and only one attendant, not a managerial staff member, was present.
Also Read: Supreme Court Wins Prestigious African Bar Award for Judicial Excellence
Judge A. Mshila concluded that the supermarket bears the duty to protect its customers from humiliation and embarrassment and that the petitioner was subjected to a search carried out in an improper manner, thereby infringing on her rights as enshrined in the Constitution.
“A declaration be and is hereby issued that the Petitioner is deserving of nominal damages assessed at Ksh500.000”
While the court acknowledged that the petitioner did not present independent witnesses or medical evidence to fully substantiate claims of trauma and humiliation, it ruled that the constitutional violations warranted nominal damages rather than the full amount sought.
The court issued declarations that Anampiu’s rights “with respect to dignity, freedom and security of her person and privacy were infringed by the acts and/or omissions of the Respondent” and that her fundamental rights under Articles 28, 31, and 46 were contravened.
Cleanshelf was also ordered to bear the costs of the petition.
Follow our WhatsApp Channel and X Account for real-time news updates.
