[2019] KEELRC 2005 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 2005 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent failed to provide sufficient evidence or call witnesses to substantiate the allegations of misconduct, impropriety, or poor performance against the claimant. The only documented accusation was addressed by the claimant with exculpatory evidence, which the respondent did not rebut....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELRC 2005 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Joyce Njeri Mathu; Respondent: Tony Monda (in his capacity as the Chairman Impala Club); Respondent: Godwin Karuga (in his capacity as the Vice Chairman Impala); Respondent: Phanuel Mathenge (in his capacity as the Club Secretary Impala Club); Respondent: Impala Club
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1974 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Cause / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the claimant; termination declared unfair; compensation awarded.
Judges
DI Wasike
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Disciplinary Process, Natural Justice, Employment Contracts
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Disciplinary Process Natural Justice Employment Contracts

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joyce Njeri Mathu

Claimant

Tony Monda (in his capacity as the Chairman Impala Club)

Respondent

Godwin Karuga (in his capacity as the Vice Chairman Impala)

Respondent

Phanuel Mathenge (in his capacity as the Club Secretary Impala Club)

Respondent

Impala Club

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's summary dismissal was unfair and contrary to the Employment Act and principles of natural justice.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent proved valid reasons for the termination as required by law.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation for unfair termination.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent failed to provide sufficient evidence or call witnesses to substantiate the allegations of misconduct, impropriety, or poor performance against the claimant. The only documented accusation was addressed by the claimant with exculpatory evidence, which the respondent did not rebut. The court held that dismissing the claimant for reasons not included in the notice to show cause or disciplinary hearing was contrary to the principles of natural justice and fair administrative justice. Consequently, the termination was declared unfair, and the claimant was entitled to compensation.

Court Disposition

judgment for the claimant; termination declared unfair; compensation awarded.

Orders

  • The termination of the claimant's service is declared unfair.
  • The claimant is awarded Kshs. 1,320,000/- being twelve months gross salary as compensation for unfair termination, subject to taxes and statutory deductions.