Veronica Wambui Waweru v Green Belt Movement [2014] KEELRC 708 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court awarded a lawyer 12 months' salary after her employer disguised pregnancy discrimination as redundancy.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the redundancy was genuine and lawful
The Claimant was wrongly targeted for retrenchment on the basis of her pregnancy; the termination violated Section 45(1) as unfair, with no valid reason and no fair procedure under Section 45(2)(a) and (c)
The court found that the reliever engaged during the Claimant's maternity leave was retained in her place, and another junior lawyer related to the founder was also recruited, undermining the claim of redundancy. The Respondent admitted non-compliance with Section 40(1) notification of the Labour Officer. The termination effected during maternity leave was found callous, malicious, and in violation of Sections 45(1), 45(2)(a) and 45(2)(c).
Whether the Claimant was discriminated on grounds of pregnancy
Yes - violation of Section 5(3) established; she was discriminated against on grounds of pregnancy
Beyond discharging her burden under Section 47(5), the Claimant established that she was victimised on account of pregnancy, declared redundant upon return from maternity leave and replaced by a junior reliever. The court found malicious intent in the timing and manner of termination by the Executive Director, making the conduct deplorable.
Appropriate remedy for unlawful and unfair termination
Maximum compensation of twelve months' salary under Section 49(1)(c) awarded, plus certificate of service under Section 51
Given the callous, malicious and discriminatory manner of termination by a highly regarded institution, the court held this a proper case for maximum compensation under Section 49(1)(c), computed at twelve months' salary of Kshs.429,000/=, and ordered issuance of a certificate of service forthwith.
Legal principles established
#- An employer who replaces a redundant employee with a junior, less qualified new employee has not demonstrated a valid reason for redundancy
- Failure to notify the Labour Officer one month in advance of retrenchment breaches Section 40(1) of the Employment Act
- Under Section 34(1) of the Employment Act, an employer without a medical cover scheme is not obliged to meet an employee's maternity medical bills beyond statutory NHIF remittances
Court orders
#- 1.Respondent to pay the Claimant maximum compensation for unlawful and unfair termination equivalent to twelve (12) months salary in the sum of Kshs.429,000/=
- 2.Respondent to issue the Claimant with a certificate of service forthwith in terms of Section 51 of the Employment Act, 2007
- 3.Respondent to pay the costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment Act, 2007 (Sections 40, 45, 47(5), 49(1)(c), 51, 34(1), 5(3)) - first-instance employment claim
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Koech v Bundotich & another (T/A M/S Kale Maina & Bundotich Advocates) (Cause 640 of 2017) [2022] KEELRC 1621 (KLR)[2022] KEELRC 1621 (KLR)27 Jul 2022
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Veronica Wambui Waweru v Green Belt Movement [2014] KEELRC 708 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Memorandum of Claim dated 29th September, 2011 (number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2014/708/eng@2014-02-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.