[2021] KEELRC 791 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 791 (KLR)

The Court found that the Respondents failed to provide the Petitioner with adequate particulars and supporting documents necessary to prepare his defence, in violation of Article 47 of the Constitution, Section 41 of the Employment Act, and the Respondent's own Human Resource Manual. The disciplinary process was marred by vagueness, lack of transparency, and disregard for procedural fairness. The Court held that the Petitioner’s interdiction was not based on valid grounds as required by Section 43 of the Employment Act and that his right to due process and fair hearing was violated. The Court further determined that the Petition was not premature, as the internal process was fundamentally...

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 791 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Jonathan Chepkwony; Respondent: George Makateto, Acting Chief Executive Officer, Export Processing Zone Authority (EPZA); Respondent: Export Processing Zone Authority (EPZA); Respondent: Export Processing Zone Authority (EPZA) Board
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
8 October 2021
Case Number
Petition 107 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
Petition allowed. Disciplinary process terminated. Petitioner reinstated. Costs to Petitioner.
Judges
DO Ogal
Legal Topics
Fair Administrative Action, Disciplinary Processes, Right to Fair Hearing, Public Service Employment, Due Process, Interdiction
Source Language
English
Employment and Labour Constitutional Law Fair Administrative Action Disciplinary Processes Right to Fair Hearing Public Service Employment Due Process Interdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jonathan Chepkwony

Applicant

George Makateto, Acting Chief Executive Officer, Export Processing Zone Authority (EPZA)

Respondent

Export Processing Zone Authority (EPZA)

Respondent

Export Processing Zone Authority (EPZA) Board

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Petitioner was subjected to a fair disciplinary process in accordance with the Constitution and the Respondent's Human Resource Manual.
  2. 2 Whether the Petitioner's rights to fair administrative action and fair labour practices were violated by the Respondents.
  3. 3 Whether the Petition was premature for failure to exhaust internal disciplinary mechanisms.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the Respondents failed to provide the Petitioner with adequate particulars and supporting documents necessary to prepare his defence, in violation of Article 47 of the Constitution, Section 41 of the Employment Act, and the Respondent's own Human Resource Manual. The disciplinary process was marred by vagueness, lack of transparency, and disregard for procedural fairness. The Court held that the Petitioner’s interdiction was not based on valid grounds as required by Section 43 of the Employment Act and that his right to due process and fair hearing was violated. The Court further determined that the Petition was not premature, as the internal process was fundamentally...

Court Disposition

Petition allowed. Disciplinary process terminated. Petitioner reinstated. Costs to Petitioner.

Orders

  • The disciplinary process against the Petitioner is terminated and the Petitioner is reinstated to his position as at 28th May 2019 without loss of benefits.
  • The Respondent may institute fresh disciplinary proceedings only if compliant with the Human Resources Policy and the law.