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 Number 458 of 2014· [2015] KEELRC 544 (KLR)

Catherine Muthoni Wairimu v Walter Reif [National Chairman of The Pubs, Entertainment and Restaurants Association of Kenya], Nasser Lalji [National Treasurer] & Njeri Kamau [Coast Region Chairperson] (Cause 458 of 2014) [2015] KEELRC 544 (KLR)

Industrial Court of Kenya
4 September 2015
3,383 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~14 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court awarded an employee 12 months' salary because her employer fired her without valid reasons or a proper disciplinary hearing.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, employed as the Pubs, Entertainment and Restaurants Association of Kenya's Executive Officer for the Coast Region from January 2013 until 30 July 2014, sued the Association's officials for unfair and unlawful termination, claiming notice pay, July 2014 salary, annual leave pay, unremitted N.S.S.F and N.H.I.F dues, 12 months' compensation, commission, and petty cash reimbursements totalling Kshs. 314,371. The Respondents asserted termination was fair, based on poor performance and insubordination, and that terminal dues of Kshs. 41,306 had been paid. The Court framed three questions: whether there were valid reasons for termination, whether the process was fair, and what remedies were merited. It held that the performance-related grounds were mere allegations in the absence of a register of members, and that the recruitment target was unrealistic given the Claimant singly manned the Mombasa office. Occasional failure to answer the Chairlady's calls did not amount to insubordination. Procedurally, warnings, a show-cause letter and a general AGM did not constitute the hearing contemplated by Sections 41 and 45 of the Employment Act; the required procedural guarantees were absent. Termination was found flawed in substance and procedure. The Court awarded Kshs. 248,681, comprising 12 months' salary compensation, one month's notice pay and annual leave pay of Kshs. 7,492, payable within 30 days. Claims for N.S.S.F/N.H.I.F refunds, petty cash, commission and July salary were refused, the latter having been paid. No order was made on costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether there were valid reasons for termination (failure to maintain and recruit members)

Holding

No valid reasons established; without a register of members the allegations were mere allegations

Reasoning

The Respondents claimed membership dwindled and the Claimant failed to recruit, but produced no register of members or membership curve to substantiate the numbers. The target of recruiting four members a month while she alone manned the Mombasa office and performed other duties was unrealistic and not reasonable, verifiable or achievable, so the first two grounds failed.

p. 5
02

Whether the Claimant's failure to answer the Chairlady's calls amounted to insubordination

Holding

Occasional failure to pick a call by a sole employee did not constitute insubordination

Reasoning

Applying Section 44(4)(d)(e) of the Employment Act, insubordination requires constant and intentional refusal to obey a reasonable order given with proper authority. The Claimant answered whenever she could; the occasional failure of a single employee manning the office and outfield to pick a superior's call did not fit that description.

p. 5
03

Whether the Claimant was accorded a fair hearing under Sections 41 and 45 of the Employment Act

Holding

No hearing in the form contemplated by the law was granted; procedural guarantees were not met

Reasoning

Warnings, a show-cause letter and attendance at the AGM did not amount to a hearing under Sections 41 and 45. A proper disciplinary hearing requires a specific panel, a charge sheet, charges read in a language understood by the employee, an opportunity to respond and defend, the right to be accompanied by a workmate or union representative, and consideration of representations. None of these procedural guarantees were afforded.

p. 5
04

Ulterior motive in the termination

Holding

The Court was left with an impression of an ulterior motive, given the timing after maternity leave and the suggestion that her replacement was related to an Association officer

Reasoning

The Claimant was a perfect employee before maternity leave, and the Respondents did not firmly discount the suggestion that the new Executive Officer was a relative of an officer. This reinforced the Court's view that the termination was not justified on the grounds given.

p. 5
05

Annual leave balance claim

Holding

Allowed in part; the Claimant took 3 months' maternity leave, not 2, so she was granted Kshs. 7,492 for 10.5 days' leave balance

Reasoning

Section 29 of the Employment Act entitles a woman to 3 months' maternity leave with full pay, not 2. Recalculating, the proportionate claim for 6 months yielded 10.5 days at a daily rate of Kshs. 713.57, resulting in Kshs. 7,492.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • Performance standards imposed on an employee must be reasonable, understandable, verifiable, measurable, equitable and achievable.
  • Insubordination under Section 44(4)(d)(e) of the Employment Act occurs where an employee constantly and intentionally refuses to obey a reasonable direct or implied order given by proper authority.
  • Issuing warnings and a notice to show cause does not amount to the hearing contemplated by Sections 41 and 45 of the Employment Act; a disciplinary hearing requires a specific panel, charge sheet, reading of charges in a language understood by the employee, an opportunity to respond, and the right to be accompanied by a workmate or union representative.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Termination was flawed both in substance and procedure, and therefore unfair
  2. 2.The Respondents shall pay compensation for unfair termination equivalent of 12 months' salary at Kshs. 222,636; 1 month salary in lieu of notice at Kshs. 18,553 and annual leave pay at Kshs. 7,492 - total Kshs. 248,681
  3. 3.The Award shall be satisfied in full within 30 days of its delivery
  4. 4.No order on the costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Industrial Court [Procedure] Rules 2010Rule 27 [1] [a]
  • Employment Act 2007Sections 41, 43, 44 [4] [d] [e], 45
  • Employment ActSection 29
  • Societies Actnull

Cases cited (4)

  • Moses Agugo v. Metric Annex Hotel
    [2014] e-KLR
  • Moses Kaunda Moro v The CMC Motors Group Limited
    [2013] eKLR
  • Maina Mwangi v. Thika Coffee Mills Limited
    [2014] e-KLR
  • Abraham Gumba v. KEMSA
    [2014] e-KLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Industrial Court [Procedure] Rules 2010, Rule 27 [1] [a]

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (8)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Catherine Muthoni Wairimu v Walter Reif [National Chairman of The Pubs, Entertainment and Restaurants Association of Kenya], Nasser Lalji [National Treasurer] & Njeri Kamau [Coast Region Chairperson] (Cause 458 of 2014) [2015] KEELRC 544 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Cause Number 458 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/544/eng@2015-09-04

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