Noah Sirengo Cheloti v Postbank Savings Bank [2015] KEELRC 711 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment and Labour Relations Court dismissed a bank employee's unfair termination claim, holding that a written hearing was enough and unexplained suspicious deposits justified dismissal.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the termination was procedurally fair and lawful
The dismissal was procedural; the show-cause letter, recorded statement, written explanation and appeal letter amounted to a sufficient hearing
The Claimant was interrogated by the investigator, received a show-cause letter, responded in writing, recorded a signed statement, and wrote an appeal. The court held the Constitution does not require an oral hearing in every dismissal, and the written hearing was sufficient. The failure to request an oral hearing under the code of conduct could not be laid at the employer's door, and the constitutional challenge to that provision failed.
Whether there was substantive justification for the dismissal
There was just cause: the Claimant could not adequately explain unusual deposits linked to a colleague convicted of fraud against the Respondent
The Respondent's investigator established a nexus between forged miscellaneous receipts used in fraud at the Kakamega branch and deposits into the Claimant's two accounts. Gitahi, who deposited the money, was charged and convicted. The Claimant's explanations (VISA card payments, a soft loan, payments to Gitahi's sister) did not dislodge the suspicion; he also deleted contact numbers. Handling stolen money was itself sufficient cause for dismissal.
Entitlement to the ancillary reliefs (medical, leave, notice pay, interdiction salary)
None of the ancillary reliefs were payable
Medical dues are concomitant with employment and not recoverable retrospectively. Notice pay is not payable on summary dismissal. Withheld interdiction salary is payable only if the interdiction is lifted, which it was not, per the authority the Claimant himself relied on. Having failed to prove unfair termination, the compensation claim also fell away.
Legal principles established
#- The burden of proving unfair termination rests on the employee, while the burden of justifying the grounds for termination rests on the employer
- An oral hearing is not constitutionally mandated in every employee dismissal; a written hearing through a show-cause process, statement and responses can suffice
- Handling stolen money, even if not an accomplice to the fraud, is sufficient cause for dismissal
Court orders
#- 1.The Claimant's suit is dismissed
- 2.The Claimant to pay the costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment claims under the Employment Act 2007 (as pleaded; sections 41, 43, 47(5) applied)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Noah Sirengo Cheloti v Postbank Savings Bank [2015] KEELRC 711 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Not stated in judgment (Industrial Cause; filed 3rd October 2012). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/711/eng@2015-06-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.