David Lei Soit v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission [2014] KEELRC 1053 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether termination on account of redundancy complied with section 40 of the Employment Act, 2007
The termination was a lawful redundancy with all terminal dues paid and was not unfair
The claimant's six-month contract lapsed but he continued in employment until termination following suitability interviews. The documentary evidence showed he failed the interviews for not being from Eldama Ravine constituency, was declared redundant and paid all dues including one month salary, leave allowance and service pay. The court found the respondent cared for and complied with section 40, making the termination fair.
Whether the claimant was discriminated against on account of ethnicity
No discrimination; the local-residence recruitment policy applied to all candidates, and the failure to appoint at Emurua Dikirr was due to academic qualification (KCSE D+ against prescribed C-)
The respondent instituted a nation-wide policy recruiting constituency clerks through suitability interviews from locals or residents except in cosmopolitan towns. The policy applied uniformly and did not discriminate. RW3's credible evidence showed the claimant's failure to be recruited at Emurua Dikirr rested solely on his academic shortfall, not ethnicity, and the local-residence preference is an inherent job requirement under section 5(3)(b).
Whether commissioners' in-fighting caused the claimant's loss of employment
The insinuations of interference by commissioners were misconceived, incredible, remote and unfounded
The claimant suggested his termination or non-recruitment flowed from in-fighting among commissioners, citing meetings with the chairperson and CEO. The court found the evidence clearly established the true reasons - failure at suitability interviews and academic ineligibility - rendering the insinuations against the commissioners irrelevant to the issues in dispute.
Entitlement to annual leave
The claimant was entitled to annual leave as prayed for despite failing on all other heads
Although the termination was found fair and discrimination was not established, the court found the claimant had established a basis for the annual leave claim, covering three months' salary as annual leave for 2010, 2011 and 2012, and entered judgment for the respondent to pay it.
Legal principles established
#- An employer is entitled to impose a guideline or policy recruiting constituency office clerks from local residents of the electoral constituency as an inherent requirement of the job, and such a distinction is not discrimination under section 5(3)(b) of the Employment Act, 2007
- An employee who fails a suitability interview on a prescribed qualification ground and is paid redundancy dues under section 40 of the Employment Act has not been unfairly terminated
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the respondent to pay the claimant annual leave as prayed for
- 2.Each party to bear own costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and labour relations dispute under the Employment Act, 2007 (first-instance claim before the Industrial Court)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "David Lei Soit v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission [2014] KEELRC 1053 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2014/1053/eng@2014-06-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.