Beth Watene Wanjiru v Barclays Bank Limited
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that a bank lawfully fired an employee for losing Ksh.500,000 because the disciplinary process followed the Employment Act.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the respondent had good cause to terminate the appellant's employment following the loss of Ksh.500,000 in her custody
- 2.Whether the disciplinary process complied with section 41 of the Employment Act, including the right to be accompanied by a colleague or union representative
- 3.Whether the trial Judge erred in dismissing the appellant's claim
Key legal issues
#Compliance with section 41 of the Employment Act in the disciplinary process
The disciplinary process was fair: the appellant was suspended, invited to a hearing with notice of her right to be accompanied, heard, and given an internal appeal which was considered and dismissed.
The Court traced the sequence of letters: suspension on 26 January 2011, invitation of 15 February 2011 expressly stating the employee was entitled to be accompanied by a colleague or union representative, the hearing on 2 March 2011 evidenced by minutes, and the internal appeal heard on 19 May 2011. There was no indication the appellant required accompaniment. The process met the statutory requirements.
Whether there was good cause for termination
Loss of Ksh.500,000 in the appellant's custody and her inability to explain it, with negligence established, constituted good cause for termination.
The Court agreed with the trial Judge that the appellant had been negligent in handling cash leading to the loss. The employer gave her an opportunity to explain the loss, took her through a disciplinary process, and considered her appeal. Termination on that basis was lawful and the trial Judge's dismissal of the claim was correct.
Legal principles established
#- An employer who invites an employee to a disciplinary hearing with notice of the right to be accompanied by a colleague or union representative, hears the employee's explanations, and allows an internal appeal, satisfies section 41 of the Employment Act.
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the leading judgment holding that the disciplinary process complied with section 41 of the Employment Act and that the termination was lawful; dismissed the appeal with costs.
The appellant was taken through all the processes required by the Employment Act and her services were lawfully terminated. I have found no merit in his appeal and I would dismiss it with costs to the respondent.p. 3
Wrote the judgment
Concurred fully with the judgment of Kantai, JA, adding nothing.
I have had the advantage of reading in draft the judgment of Kantai, JA. I am in full agreement with his reasoning and conclusions and, therefore, have nothing useful to add.p. 3
Wrote the judgment
Concurred with the judgment of Kantai, JA, which became the judgment of the Court.
I have had the benefit of reading in draft, the judgment of Kantai, J.A. I entirely agree with the reasoning and conclusion arrived thereat and have nothing useful to add.
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- ELRC Cause No. 493 of 2012
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over the Employment and Labour Relations Court
Relief refused
#Reinstatement or terminal dues and compensation as sought in the underlying claim
The disciplinary process complied with the Employment Act and the termination was lawful; the appeal lacked merit.
Costs
Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The appellant was taken through all the processes required by the Employment Act and her services were lawfully terminated. I have found no merit in his appeal and I would dismiss it with costs to the respondent.
It was decided, after the said meeting, that the appellant's services be terminated and, as we have seen, the appellant appealed the decision; her appeal was heard and the respondent reached the decision to uphold the termination.
I have considered the whole record and I am in full agreement with the decision reached by the Judge.
Issues in the judgment
#Judgment refers to the appellant with male pronouns ('his appeal') despite the appellant being female.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Beth Watene Wanjiru v Barclays Bank Limited", Case Analysis (2022). Civil Appeal 28 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2022/1084/eng@2022-10-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.