Professor Gitile J. Naituli v Multi Media University College & another [2013] KEELRC 221 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court blocked Multimedia University from sidelining a deputy principal, ruling his protected five-year tenure couldn't be cut short by an acting appointment.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Claimant established a prima facie case with a probability of success
Yes - the memorandum appointing an Acting Deputy Vice Chancellor infringed the claimant's contractual right to serve his unexpired five-year term notwithstanding section 76(2) of the Universities Act, 2012
The court applied section 76(2) of the Universities Act, 2012, which preserves in mandatory terms the tenure of principals and deputy principals of constituent colleges for the remaining period of their terms. It was uncontested that the claimant held a five-year contract running to 7th February 2016, which was still in place when the Act became operational. Appointing Professor Njoroge to act in the claimant's role therefore appeared to infringe an existing right calling for explanation or rebuttal, satisfying the prima facie case threshold in Giella v Cassman Brown.
Whether the claimant would suffer irreparable harm not compensable by damages
Yes - demotion from a leadership position stunts career progression irrevocably
The court held it was insufficient for the respondents to say the claimant's remuneration was unaffected. Removal from a leadership position amounted to an effective demotion that negatively affects career progression in a way damages cannot correct. The claimant, a professor of long standing and repute, faced stunting of career growth and development that was irrevocable, satisfying the second Giella v Cassman Brown criterion.
Whether the balance of convenience favoured the grant of the injunction
Yes - prudence and convenience required the respondent to await the outcome before replacing the claimant
Having found the degree of probability met, the court held that prudence and convenience dictated that the respondent wait a little longer before replacing the claimant from the position he held by virtue of his unspent contract and the provisions of the Universities Act, 2012. This disposed of the third Giella v Cassman Brown criterion and supported granting the restraining orders pending trial.
Legal principles established
#- Section 76(2) of the Universities Act, 2012 mandates that a principal or deputy principal of a constituent college of a public university remain in office for the remaining period of his or her term
- Stripping an employee of a leadership position is a demotion affecting career progression irreparably, not adequately compensable in damages
Court orders
#- 1.Prayers 3 to 9 of the Notice of Motion granted
- 2.Respondents restrained from advertising the claimant's post of Deputy Principal (Finance and Administration) in the media or otherwise until trial or further orders
- 3.Respondents restrained from intimidating, harassing or frustrating the claimant until trial or further orders
- 4.Respondents restrained from interfering with the claimant's discharge of duties as Deputy Principal (Finance and Administration) pursuant to the internal memorandum dated 4th April, 2013 appointing Professor Charles Njoroge Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor Administration & Finance until trial or further orders
- 5.Respondents restrained from interfering with the claimant's discharge of duties under his five-year contract of employment dated 8th February 2011 as amended in July 2011 until trial or further orders
- 6.Respondents restrained from interfering with the claimant's discharge of duties as Associate Professor, Faculty of Business, under his contract dated 23rd June, 2010 until trial or further orders
- 7.Respondents restrained from suspending or dismissing the claimant until trial or further orders
- 8.Costs of the application provided for
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and labour relations jurisdiction of the Industrial Court; application under Notice of Motion in a cause
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (4)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- West Kenya Sugar Company Ltd & 3 others v Kenya Union of Sugar Plantation and Allied Worker (Cause E030 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 615 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 615 (KLR)27 Feb 2025
- Dorothy Njoki Ndung’u v Machakos University College & another [2016] KEELRC 17 (KLR)[2016] KEELRC 17 (KLR)13 Oct 2016
- Fred Onyango Aduda v Kamongo Waste Paper Limited [2015] KEELRC 1215 (KLR)[2015] KEELRC 1215 (KLR)6 Mar 2015
- Dorothy Ndavi v Board Of Management Of Kenya High School & 3 others [2014] KEELRC 1041 (KLR)[2014] KEELRC 1041 (KLR)9 Jun 2014
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Professor Gitile J. Naituli v Multi Media University College & another [2013] KEELRC 221 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Cause (Notice of Motion dated 10th April, 2013). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2013/221/eng@2013-08-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.