Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealDismissedCivil Appeal No. 104 of 2009· [2016] KECA 751 (KLR)

Kiage Peter Wa Mochama & another v Standard Chartered Bank Limited [2016] KECA 751 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
26 February 2016
3,061 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that defamation claims die with the person, and employers can terminate on paying notice salary as the contract allows.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The appellants, personal representatives of the estate of Felix Wilson Mochama, appealed against a High Court ruling (Lenaola, J., dated 10 February 2009 in H.C.C.C No. 172 of 1995) dismissing the deceased's claims for defamation and unlawful dismissal against Standard Chartered Bank. Before the merits, the respondent raised two preliminary points: that a defamation claim does not survive the deceased under the proviso to Section 2(1) of the Law Reform Act, and that the appellants' limited grant ad litem gave them no locus to prosecute the appeal. The Court of Appeal upheld the preliminary objection on survival, holding that defamation is a personal action that dies with the person; the dead have no legally protectable reputation, so neither the estate nor relatives can maintain the claim. The court therefore declined to consider the defamation grounds. On the employment claim, the court held that the contract expressly permitted termination without reasons on payment of one month's salary in lieu of notice, which the Bank paid; following Rift Valley Textiles and Kenya Ports Authority, no damages beyond the notice period were payable. The appellant's reliance on Section 45(2) of the Employment Act, 2007 failed because the cause of action arose in 1994 and that Act is not retroactive. The remaining grounds were found without merit. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety with costs to the respondent, affirming the decision of the High Court.

Key legal issues

#
01

Survival of defamation actions after death

Holding

Defamation claims do not survive the deceased and cannot be maintained by the estate or personal representatives

Reasoning

The court read the proviso to Section 2(1) of the Law Reform Act as expressly excluding causes of action for defamation from surviving death. Defamation is a personal action that dies with the person (actio personalis moritur cum persona); the dead have no legally protected reputation capable of being damaged, so neither the estate nor descendants or relatives can maintain the claim. The preliminary objection was therefore upheld and the defamation grounds of appeal were not considered.

p. 5
02

Lawfulness of termination under a notice clause

Holding

Termination on payment of one month's salary in lieu of notice was lawful and no reasons or damages were required

Reasoning

The contract of employment expressly permitted termination forthwith without reasons on payment of one month's salary in lieu of notice. The Bank paid the one month's salary. Following Rift Valley Textiles and Kenya Ports Authority, where a notice period is provided the employer need not justify the termination, and damages are measured by the wages for the notice period only. The trial court's dismissal of the employment claim was affirmed.

p. 5
03

Retrospective application of the Employment Act, 2007

Holding

Section 45(2) of the Employment Act, 2007 does not apply to a cause of action arising in 1994

Reasoning

The appellant relied on Section 45(2) of the Employment Act, 2007 on unfair dismissal. The court held that the cause of action arose in 1994, before the Act was enacted, and that parties' rights are governed by the law existing when the cause of action arose. Unless expressly stated, the Act is not retroactive, so the statutory unfair dismissal regime was inapplicable.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • A cause of action for defamation does not survive the death of the claimant under the proviso to Section 2(1) of the Law Reform Act (Cap 26); it cannot be prosecuted by the deceased's estate or personal representatives, whether the suit was filed before or after death
  • Where a contract of employment provides a notice period for termination, the employer need not assign any reason for terminating the contract on payment of salary in lieu of notice, and damages are limited to wages for the period of notice
  • The Employment Act, 2007 does not apply retrospectively to causes of action that arose before its enactment

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The respondent's preliminary objection on the survival of the defamation claim is upheld
  2. 2.The appeal is dismissed in its entirety
  3. 3.Costs of the appeal are awarded to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Law Reform Act (Cap 26 of the Laws of Kenya)Section 2(1)
  • Employment Act, 2007Section 45(2)

Cases cited (12)

  • E.A. Airways -v- Knight
    (1975) EA 165
  • Joseph Mangtup Din -v- African Newspaper of Nigeria Limited
    No. 44/1986
  • Gibson Kagoi Mwangi -v- Kenyatta National Hospital & Another
    (2014) eKLR
  • Hon. Emmanuel Karisa Maitha -v- Nation Media Group Limited & Another
    (2007) eKLR
  • University of Nairobi -v- Mbuthia
    (1985) KLR 821
  • Ombanya -v- Gailey & Roberts Limited
    (1994) EA 522
  • Rift Valley Textiles Limited -v- Edward Onyango Oganda
    Civil Appeal No. 27 of 1992
  • Kenya Ports Authority -v- Edward Otieno
    Civil Appeal No. 120 of 1997
  • Central Bank of Kenya -v- Julius Nkonge Nkabu
    Civil Appeal No. 81 of 2000
  • Selle -vs- Associated Motor Boat Co.
    [1968] EA 123
  • Abdul Hameed Saif vs. Ali Mohamed Sholan
    (1955) 22 E.A.C.A. 270
  • Raju -v- Chacko
    (2005) 4 KLT 197
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
H.C.C.C No. 172 of 1995
Jurisdiction invoked
First appeal to the Court of Appeal under the Court of Appeal's appellate jurisdiction (no specific constitutional or statutory provision is cited in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (3)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kiage Peter Wa Mochama & another v Standard Chartered Bank Limited [2016] KECA 751 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Civil Appeal No. 104 of 2009. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2016/751/eng@2016-02-26

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.