Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedNot stated in judgment· [2014] KEELRC 849 (KLR)

Peter Otieno Ndhere & another v Secretary, Bog Joyland Special Sec. School [2014] KEELRC 849 (KLR)

Industrial Court of Kenya (Employment and Labour Relations Court)
14 March 2014
618 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan school unlawfully terminated security guards by staying silent after their acquittal, and was ordered to pay 12 months' salary each.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Two claimants, formerly employed by the respondents as security guards from 2001 until 2010, sued for unlawful termination and unpaid terminal benefits. They were arrested in April 2010 and charged before Winam PMCC No. 622 of 2010 over a theft at the respondents' school. Following the charges they were suspended by letters dated 21.6.2010 which stated the suspension would stand until the criminal case was heard and determined. They were acquitted under Section 210 of the CPC on 26.7.2012, after which their advocate wrote to the respondents on 2.8.2012 seeking their return to work. The respondents never replied. The court framed two issues: whether the termination was fair and lawful, and whether the claimants were entitled to the prayers sought. The court held that by failing to respond after the acquittal, the respondents went against their own suspension letters and constructively terminated the claimants through silence, without the hearing mandated by Section 41 of the Employment Act 2007. The termination was found unlawful and unjustified. Each claimant was awarded one month's salary in lieu of notice (Kshs 12,000) and 12 months' salary as compensation for unlawful termination, with costs of the case to the claimants. The case was determined on pleadings and submissions by consent, with no witnesses called.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the claimants' termination was fair and lawful

Holding

The termination was unlawful and unjustified; the respondents constructively terminated the claimants by silence after their acquittal and denied them a hearing under Section 41 of the Employment Act 2007.

Reasoning

The suspension letters stated suspension would stand until the criminal case was determined. The claimants were acquitted on 26.7.2012 and their advocate wrote on 2.8.2012 requesting reinstatement, but the respondents never responded. By their silence the respondents constructively terminated the claimants contrary to their own suspension letters and without the hearing required by Section 41 of the Employment Act 2007.

p. 2
02

Whether the claimants are entitled to remedies

Holding

Each claimant awarded one month's salary in lieu of notice and 12 months' salary as compensation for unlawful termination.

Reasoning

Having found the termination unlawful and unjustified, the court awarded each claimant notice pay of Kshs 12,000 and compensation equivalent to 12 months' salary at Kshs 12,000 per month, plus costs, based on the salary of Ksh 12,000 per month each claimant earned at termination.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Termination of an employee requires a fair hearing as mandated by Section 41 of the Employment Act 2007; continued suspension beyond the stated purpose without hearing amounts to constructive termination.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Each claimant to be paid 1 month salary in lieu of notice of Kshs 12,000
  2. 2.Each claimant to be paid 12 months' salary as compensation for unlawful termination (Ksh 12,000 X 12), total Ksh 144,000 per claimant
  3. 3.The claimants shall be paid costs of this case

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 41
  • Criminal Procedure CodeSection 210
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and labour relations jurisdiction under the Employment Act 2007

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Peter Otieno Ndhere & another v Secretary, Bog Joyland Special Sec. School [2014] KEELRC 849 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2014/849/eng@2014-03-14

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