[2015] KEELRC 1543 (KLR)

[2015] KEELRC 1543 (KLR)

The court found that there was a valid reason for the claimant's dismissal, namely theft of company property, as established by the evidence of the security officer and the respondent's witnesses. However, since the claimant was not summarily dismissed but rather terminated, he was entitled to two months' notice or...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEELRC 1543 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Khaemba Wycliff Nyongesa; Respondent: General Plastics Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1501 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Claim partly allowed; claimant awarded notice pay, costs, and interest.
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Summary Dismissal, Terminal Benefits, Notice Pay, Employee Misconduct
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unlawful Termination Summary Dismissal Terminal Benefits Notice Pay Employee 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khaemba Wycliff Nyongesa

Claimant

General Plastics Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's termination was lawful and justified.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to terminal benefits and compensation for unfair dismissal.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent followed due process in terminating the claimant's employment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was a valid reason for the claimant's dismissal, namely theft of company property, as established by the evidence of the security officer and the respondent's witnesses. However, since the claimant was not summarily dismissed but rather terminated, he was entitled to two months' notice or payment in lieu thereof, as provided in his contract. The court held that the respondent was obligated to pay the claimant two months' salary in lieu of notice, together with costs of the suit and interest at court rates from the date of judgment until payment in full. The claim for other terminal benefits was not allowed as the termination was found to be substantively justified.

Court Disposition

Claim partly allowed; claimant awarded notice pay, costs, and interest.

Orders

  • Respondent to pay claimant two months' salary in lieu of notice in the sum of Ksh.62,332.00.
  • Respondent to pay costs of the suit.