[2017] KEELRC 523 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 523 (KLR)

The court found that the Claimant's employment was terminated for a valid reason—failure to ensure the safe custody of the Respondent's motor vehicle, which resulted in unauthorized use by a third party. The evidence showed that the Claimant, while serving as Fleet Manager, did not prevent or report the unauthorized...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 523 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Francis Kamendi; Respondent: Kenya Breweries Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 2292 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
L Ndolo
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Redundancy Claims, Disciplinary Procedure, Gross Misconduct
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unlawful Termination Redundancy Claims Disciplinary Procedure Gross Misconduct

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Francis Kamendi

Claimant

Kenya Breweries Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the Claimant’s employment was lawful and fair.
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant is entitled to the remedies sought.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Claimant's employment was terminated for a valid reason—failure to ensure the safe custody of the Respondent's motor vehicle, which resulted in unauthorized use by a third party. The evidence showed that the Claimant, while serving as Fleet Manager, did not prevent or report the unauthorized use of the vehicle, constituting gross misconduct. The Respondent followed the mandatory disciplinary procedures, including issuing a show cause letter, conducting disciplinary hearings, and allowing the Claimant to respond to the allegations. There was no evidence to support the Claimant's assertion that he was declared redundant; rather, the termination was for misconduct....

Court Disposition

claim dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The entire claim is dismissed with costs to the Respondent.