[2000] KEHC 291 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff's dismissal was unlawful because the reason given ('doubted integrity') did not amount to gross misconduct justifying summary dismissal under the employment contract. The plaintiff was therefore entitled to three months' notice or salary in lieu thereof, as well as salary and house...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2000] KEHC 291 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Christopher Owiti Agwata; Defendant: Kenya Posts & Telecommunication Co-operation
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 3939 of 1994
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Review and Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Judgment for the plaintiff; application for review allowed; award amended to include house allowance for suspension and notice periods.
- Judges
- JL Osiemo
- Legal Topics
- Wrongful Dismissal, Unlawful Termination, Employment Contracts, Notice Periods, Remuneration Entitlements
- 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
Christopher Owiti Agwata
Plaintiff
Kenya Posts & Telecommunication Co-operation
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Review and Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff's dismissal from employment was unlawful.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to salary and house allowance for the suspension period and notice period.
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to general damages for wrongful dismissal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff's dismissal was unlawful because the reason given ('doubted integrity') did not amount to gross misconduct justifying summary dismissal under the employment contract. The plaintiff was therefore entitled to three months' notice or salary in lieu thereof, as well as salary and house allowance for the period of suspension prior to dismissal. The court declined to award general damages for wrongful dismissal, holding that the plaintiff's entitlement was limited to contractual notice and related benefits. The judgment was subsequently reviewed to correct the omission of house allowance for the relevant periods, resulting in a total award of Kshs.82,478.20 in...
Court Disposition
Judgment for the plaintiff; application for review allowed; award amended to include house allowance for suspension and notice periods.
Orders
- Judgment entered for the plaintiff in the sum of Kshs.82,478.20 with costs and interest.
- Judgment amended to include house allowance for 11 months of suspension and 3 months' notice period.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
34 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL CASE NO. 3939 OF 1994
CHRISTOPHER OWITI AGWATA ……………. PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
KENYA POSTS & TELECOMMUNICATION
CO-OPERATION ………………………………. DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
This application by way of chamber summons seeks order to review the judgement of this court delivered on 27. 7.2000 to include house allowance for 11 months at Kshs.1,600/= the duration the plaintiff was suspended and also for 3 months notice period which was erroneously omitted. The application is not opposed. Allowed. This will work out as follows:- 14 x 1600 = 22,600/=. The Judgement is amended to read an award of Kshs.82,478. 20.
Order accordingly.
J.L.A OSIEMO
JUDGE
9. 10. 2000
CHRISTOPHER OWITI AGWATA ……………………….. PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
KENYA POSTS & TELECOMMUNICATION)
C-OPERATION ………………………………………….. DEFENDANT
J U D G E M E N T
The Plaintiff was employed by the defendant on the 23rd September, 1981 as technical assistant G. II. He was confirmed on his employment and was placed on permanent and pensionable terms on 21st June, 1988. On 21st May, 1993 he was arrested along with others by the police on suspicious that they were involved in diversion of telephone lines for making fraudulent international calls. But they were not charged with any offence in a court of law for lack of sufficient evidence.
The defendant carried out material investigations and recommendations were made in respect of each of those employees who had been arrested. It was recommended that some be dismissed others be demoted but it was recommended that the Plaintiff be reinstated with a warning.
But despite that recommendation. On 28th March, 1994, the defendant served the Plaintiff with a dismissal letter. The reason given for the dismissal was“doubted integrity”.
This according to the terms of the contract of employment would not warrant summary dismissal and the Plaintiff was entitled to a 3 months notice or one month’s salary lieu of notice. The dismissal was therefore unlawful and I so declare. The next pray sought by the Plaintiff is general damages for wrongful dismissal. This the Plaintiff is not entitled to. All what the Plaintiff was entitled to is a 3 months notice as stipulated in the contract of employment.
I awarded the Plaintiff 3 months salary which was a requirement for terminating his services.
This is to be calculated at the scale at the time his services were terminated. This would work out as follows 4,362. 80 x 3 =13,088. 40. The Plaintiff is also entitled to his salary for the whole duration he was suspended to the time he received termination letter, which was 11 months.
This would work out as follows:
4,362. 80 x 11 = 47,989. 80
The Plaintiff was also entitled to 11 months house allowance. This would work out as follows
11 x 1,600 = 16,600/=
He was also entitled to house allowance for the period of notice. This would work out as follows:
3 x 1600 = 4800
Accordingly there shall be Judgment for the Plaintiff and against the defendant for Shs.82,478. 20 with costs and interest.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 11th day of October, 2000
J.L.A OSIMEO
JUDGE