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. 203 of 2012 (inferred from Statement of Claim filed 15th August 2012)· [2015] KEELRC 613 (KLR)

Joseph Aleper & another v Lodwar Water and Sanitation Company Limited [2015] KEELRC 613 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
29 July 2015
3,894 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~16 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court ruled that an employer who suspends, audits, and sidelines employees without cause constructively fired them, awarding over Kshs 1.4 million.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimants, formerly Managing Director and Commercial/Finance & Human Resource Manager of Lodwar Water and Sanitation Company Limited (LOWASCO), sued claiming constructive termination of their fixed-term employment. They alleged that after a Board meeting on 31st March 2012 they were suspended on twelve allegations, later cleared by an external audit, kept on compulsory leave for about four months contrary to the respondent's HR Manual, and that the respondent restructured and advertised their positions under new titles with higher qualifications designed to lock them out, while failing to allocate them duties. The respondent admitted paying them throughout pursuant to consent orders and denied the 2nd claimant's promotion, filing a counter-claim seeking a refund of monies paid to him in an allegedly unauthorized position. The court, framed four issues and held that the cumulative conduct of suspension, audit, denial of instructions and cessation of remuneration amounted to constructive termination under the contract test in Western Excavating v Sharp, applying Article 41 of the Constitution. The claimants were awarded gratuity and four months' salary as compensation (Kshs. 770,000.00 for the 1st claimant and Kshs. 660,000.00 for the 2nd), but not salaries to the end of their contracts or notice pay, having already been paid to the end of their terms. The counter-claim was dismissed on the probability of the respondent's acquiescence in the 2nd claimant's appointment. The respondent was ordered to bear the costs of the cause. Judgment was delivered on 29th July 2015 by D.K. Njagi Marete, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether there was constructive termination of the claimants' employment

Holding

Yes - the court found constructive termination of both claimants' contracts

Reasoning

The court applied the contract test from Western Excavating v Sharp and the two facets of constructive dismissal: unilateral alteration of the contract (advertising the claimants' jobs under different titles with higher qualifications locking them out) and making working conditions intolerable (suspension, audit, denial of duties and remuneration). The claimants were not responsible for their circumstances; the employer's misconduct rendered them unemployed.

p. 7
02

Whether the claimants are entitled to the relief sought

Holding

Partially - gratuity and 4 months' compensation awarded; salaries to end of contract and notice pay refused

Reasoning

Having established constructive termination, relief followed, but because the claimants were paid salaries to the end of their contract terms pursuant to court orders, they could not recover those salaries, and notice pay was not feasible. The court instead awarded gratuity and a reduced compensation of four months' salary to each claimant.

p. 7
03

Whether the respondent's counter-claim succeeds

Holding

No - the counter-claim was dismissed

Reasoning

The respondent disowned the 2nd claimant's promotion to Commercial/Finance and Human Resource Manager as unauthorized. However, the anomalous appointment continued unchallenged from January 2012 until the suspension, and the 1st claimant testified the appointment was approved by the Board with the chairman signing the letter. On a balance of probability, acquiescence by the respondent was probable, defeating the counter-claim.

p. 8

Legal principles established

#
  • Constructive dismissal, though not statutorily backed in Kenya, applies through the doctrine of discharge by breach where the employer's conduct is a significant breach going to the root of the contract, aided by the constitutional right to fair labour practices under Article 41
  • Suspension, audit of operations, denial of duties and cessation of remuneration that render an employee unemployed without the employee's fault amount to constructive termination

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Award to the 1st Claimant of gratuity of Kshs. 446,000.00 and 4 months' compensation for unlawful termination of employment (4 x Kshs. 86,000.00 = Kshs. 344,000.00), totalling Kshs. 770,000.00
  2. 2.Award to the 2nd Claimant of gratuity of Kshs. 372,000.00 and 4 months' compensation for unlawful termination of employment (4 x Kshs. 72,000.00 = Kshs. 288,000.00), totalling Kshs. 660,000.00
  3. 3.The respondent to bear the costs of the cause
  4. 4.Dismissal of the respondent's counter-claim

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSections 5 and 45
  • Redundancy Payments Act 1965 (England)
  • Trade Unions and Labour Relations Act, 1974 (England)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 41
  • Human Resource Policy and Procedures Manual of the Respondent (2011)Section 2.1

Cases cited (5)

  • Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp
    [1978] ICR 221
  • Anthony Mkala Chitavi v Malindi Water & Sewerage Company Ltd
    Cause No. 64 of 2012
  • Emmanuel Mutisya Solomon v Agility Logistics
    Cause No. 1418 of 2011
  • Benuel Mariera v Awand Enterprises Limited
    Cause No. 191 of 2013
  • Re English Joint Stock Bank, Yelland's Case
    (1867) L.R. 4 Eq. 350
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under Article 162(2) of the Constitution (employment and labour relations disputes), invoked by Statement of Claim and Notice of Motion filed with a Certificate of Urgency

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (1)

#

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, "Joseph Aleper & another v Lodwar Water and Sanitation Company Limited [2015] KEELRC 613 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Cause No. 203 of 2012 (inferred from Statement of Claim filed 15th August 2012). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/613/eng@2015-07-29

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