Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedCause No. 971 of 2013· [2015] KEELRC 65 (KLR)

Andrew Mwanjala Mwandawiro v Sdv Transami Kenya Limited [2015] KEELRC 65 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya
14 December 2015
1,059 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court ruled that paying one month's salary in lieu of notice does not make a dismissal fair if the employee was never told why they were being fired.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, Andrew Mwanjala Mwandawiro, sued SDV Transami Kenya Limited claiming he was summarily dismissed on 27th June 2007 without reasons or a hearing, having served as security manager (and later in Shunting Administration) since 6th September 2005. He sought redress after attempted arbitration failed. The Respondent justified the termination as lawful and contractually sanctioned, and also argued the claim was vexatious and time barred. The court declined to revisit limitation, noting Justice Makau's ruling of 27th May 2013 had already held the claim was not time barred. The court held that the operative law was the repealed Employment Act Cap 226, under which an employer terminating on one month's notice or payment in lieu was not required to give reasons. The Respondent had paid one month's salary in lieu of notice, complying with clause 5 of the contract and sections 14(1)(iii) and 16 of the repealed Act. Nevertheless, the court found that failing to inform the Claimant of the reasons for termination and denying him an opportunity to defend himself against the allegations breached the rules of natural justice, in particular the right to be heard. The dismissal was therefore held unfair and unjustified. The court awarded the Claimant 12 months' salary as damages for unlawful termination (12 x 86,400 = Kshs. 1,036,800) and ordered the Respondents to pay the costs of the suit. Judgment was read in open court on 14th December 2015 with no appearance by either party.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the summary dismissal of the Claimant was wrongful and unlawful

Holding

The dismissal was unfair and unjustified notwithstanding payment of one month's salary in lieu of notice, because the Claimant was neither told the reasons for termination nor given a hearing.

Reasoning

The applicable law was the repealed Employment Act Cap 226, under which an employer was not required to assign reasons where the contract was terminable by notice or payment in lieu. The Respondent complied with clause 5 of the contract and sections 14(1)(iii) and 16 of the repealed Act by paying one month's salary in lieu of notice. However, the court applied the rules of natural justice - audi alteram partem - holding that condemnation without a hearing breached natural justice and rendered the dismissal unfair.

p. 3
02

Whether the claim was time barred

Holding

The limitation objection was not entertained because it had already been determined in a prior ruling by Hon. J. Makau.

Reasoning

The Respondent argued the claim was time barred, but the court declined to revisit the issue since Justice Makau had ruled on 27th May 2013 that the claim was not time barred and could be filed by 27th June 2013.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Even where a contract terminable by notice was terminated strictly under the repealed Employment Act Cap 226, failure to inform the employee of the reasons for termination and denial of an opportunity to be heard breaches the rules of natural justice and renders the dismissal unfair.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Award of 12 months' salary as damages for unlawful termination: 12 x 86,400 = Kshs. 1,036,800
  2. 2.Respondents to pay costs of the suit

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment Act (repealed)Section 14(1)(iii)
  • Employment Act (repealed)Section 16
  • Employment Act Cap 226 Laws of Kenya (repealed)
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act (claim for unfair termination)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Andrew Mwanjala Mwandawiro v Sdv Transami Kenya Limited [2015] KEELRC 65 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Cause No. 971 of 2013. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/65/eng@2015-12-14

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