Ruth Alinda & another v Gucokaniriria Kihato Traders and Farmers Co. Ltd [2014] KEELRC 1027 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled two employees unfairly sacked over company politics must be paid eight months' salary because no proper disciplinary process was followed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the reason for termination was a fair reason under section 45 of the Employment Act
The reason - association with the sacked CEO while allegedly on official duty - was not a fair reason; the claimants were wrongfully and unfairly terminated.
The respondent alleged the claimants absconded on 24th October 2013, but the claimants contended they were away on official duty with the CEO. The dismissal letters cited failure to detach from the sacked CEO, indicating the terminations arose from internal management wrangling rather than genuine misconduct, rendering the reason unfair under section 45.
Whether a fair procedure under sections 41 and 45(2)(c) was followed
No fair procedure was followed: no disciplinary hearing was proved and no notice to show cause was issued.
Although the dismissal letters referred to oral representations, no evidence was tendered showing a disciplinary hearing took place in accordance with section 41. The essential requirements of an opportunity to make representations, in person or through a third party, and a notice to show cause before dismissal for misconduct were absent.
Legal principles established
#- For a dismissal for misconduct to be fair, the employee must be accorded an opportunity to make representations, in person or through a third party, as required by section 41 of the Employment Act.
- An allegation of absence from duty must be confronted with a notice to show cause before dismissal.
- Employees caught up in management wrangling who are dismissed for association with a disfavoured executive are unfairly terminated.
Court orders
#- 1.Payment of salary for the month of October 2013
- 2.One month's pay in lieu of notice
- 3.Eight months' salary as compensation for unfair termination of employment
- 4.Respondent to issue the claimants with certificates of service
- 5.Costs of the suit to the claimants
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 41, 45 and 49(1) of the Employment Act (unfair termination jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ruth Alinda & another v Gucokaniriria Kihato Traders and Farmers Co. Ltd [2014] KEELRC 1027 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Not stated in the judgment text provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2014/1027/eng@2014-06-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.