[2015] KEELRC 1626 (KLR)
The court found that the claimant had not demonstrated any breach of internal disciplinary procedures by the respondent. The claimant was given a notice to show cause, responded, and attended a disciplinary hearing. The court reiterated that it would only interfere with the employer's disciplinary process in...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEELRC 1626 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Alexander Njau Chege; Respondent: ABT Associcates Inc
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 540 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Disciplinary Procedure, Summary Dismissal, Injunctive Relief, Anticipatory Suit
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Alexander Njau Chege
Claimant
ABT Associcates Inc
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should restrain the respondent from summarily dismissing the claimant pending determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether the respondent has denied the claimant a fair hearing in the disciplinary process.
- 3 Whether the court should interfere with the employer's prerogative to discipline its employee before the process is concluded.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimant had not demonstrated any breach of internal disciplinary procedures by the respondent. The claimant was given a notice to show cause, responded, and attended a disciplinary hearing. The court reiterated that it would only interfere with the employer's disciplinary process in exceptional circumstances, which were not present in this case. No prima facie case was established to warrant injunctive relief. The court emphasized that the claimant could seek redress if aggrieved by the final decision of the employer, but anticipatory relief before the conclusion of the process was unwarranted.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application for an injunction is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS
COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 540 OF 2015
ALEXANDER NJAU CHEGE ………..................... CLAIMANT
VERSUS
ABT ASSOCICATES INC ............................... RESPONDENT
Mrs. Njoroge for Claimant
Mr. Omulama for Respondent
RULING
Application dated 2nd April, 2015, was brought under a Certificate of Urgency, seeking inter alia, for orders –
That pending the hearing and determination of this Application, the Respondent be and is hereby restrained by an order of this court from summarily dismissing the Claimant from the employment or issuing him with a termination letter or any such other adverse acts connected therewith.
The Application is based on grounds set out on the face of the Notice of Motion that the Respondent has unfairly, maliciously, falsely, unjustly and/or irregularly implicated the Claimant in purported insubordination with the sole intention of unfairly dismissing him from employment.
That the Respondent has denied the Claimant a fair hearing to defend himself and all correspondence received from the Claimant in response to the accusations levelled against him has been wantonly disregarded by the Respondent.
The Application was accompanied by a Statement of Claim restating these facts. No disciplinary action had been taken against the Claimant by the time he filed this suit.
As a matter of fact, the Claimant seeks anticipated remedies in the event he is summarily dismissed.
Replying Affidavit
The Respondent has through the Replying Affidavit of Purity Gichuru, the Deputy Chief of Party operations of the Respondent stated that, it is the Respondent’s intention to proceed with a disciplinary hearing against the Claimant for misconduct and insubordination.
That the Claimant has been furnished with a charge sheet dated 26th March, 2015, following a notice to show cause dated 4th March, 2015 given to the Claimant.
That the Claimant attended a disciplinary hearing and only a verdict on the matter was awaited when he rushed to court to forestall the outcome.
Determination
The court has considered the submissions by the parties and notes that, this is an attempt by an employee to drag the court to the shop floor.
The court has stated time and again that, it would interfere with the prerogative of an employer to manage its human resources only in exceptional circumstances.
Matters of discipline falls squarely within the purview of the employer as guided by the internal instruments/manuals, developed for that purpose.
The Claimant has not demonstrated that there is in existence, an internal instrument/manual at his workplace which has not been followed by the Respondent in the intended disciplinary process.
The Claimant was issued with a notice to show cause; he responded to the same; the claimant attended a disciplinary hearing but wants to injunct the outcome.
No prima face case has been established to warrant the court to grant an injunction pending the outcome of an anticipatory suit.
The court expects that the Respondent will look into the issues at hand justly and arrive at a fair outcome.
In the event the Claimant is aggrieved by the final decision of the employer, he is at liberty to approach the court. Otherwise, the anticipatory suit filed before the event will be to no avail.
The Application is dismissed with costs.
Dated and Delivered at Nairobi this 21st day of August, 2015.
MATHEWS NDERI NDUMA
PRINCIPAL JUDGE