Michael Edmunt Arochi & another v Memusi Academy [2015] KEELRC 796 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled Memusi Academy unfairly fired two employees without valid reasons or a hearing, awarding them over Kshs. 520,000 plus costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of reasons for termination of the 1st Claimant
No valid reasons were proved; the alleged misconducts were speculative and unsubstantiated
The Respondent alleged absconding, abusive language, insubordination, corruption, dishonesty and poor performance but adduced no evidence of these misdeeds. The 1st Claimant produced examination results showing improved performance. His woes began after his letter agitating for better pay, which the Respondent did not deny receiving. The court found the reasons speculative rather than real.
Validity of reasons for termination of the 2nd Claimant
No valid reason was established; the Respondent's own evidence contradicted its defence
The Respondent pleaded desertion of duty, but RW1 testified in oral evidence that the 2nd Claimant was basically a cleaner who lacked a medical certificate and was sent away on that basis. These contradictory reasons meant no genuine reason for termination was proved.
Procedural fairness (due process) before dismissal
The Claimants were not accorded any hearing, so their terminations were unfair and wrongful under Section 41 of the Employment Act
Section 41 requires an employer to explain the reasons for contemplated termination to the employee in a language the employee understands, allow an accompanying representative, and hear and consider representations. Nothing on the record showed any such process was followed for either Claimant.
Entitlement to remedies
The 1st Claimant failed on underpayment but succeeded on notice, service pay, house allowance and 6 months' compensation; the 2nd Claimant, who was paid below the basic minimum wage, succeeded on underpayment and the other heads
There was no proof of underpayment for the 1st Claimant, who earned 15,000/= consolidated and cited no regulation entitling him to more. The 2nd Claimant was paid 4,000/= against the minimum wage of 9,500/= and was awarded the differential for 12 months, plus notice, service pay, house allowance and 6 months' compensation for each Claimant.
Legal principles established
#- Under Section 43 of the Employment Act, the employer bears the burden of proving the reason or reasons for termination, failing which the termination is deemed unfair under Section 45
- Reasons for termination must be genuine and real, not speculative, at the time of termination
- Before termination on grounds of misconduct, poor performance or physical incapacity, an employer must explain the reasons to the employee and hear their representations as required by Section 41 of the Employment Act
Court orders
#- 1.1st Claimant awarded 1 month salary in lieu of notice of Kshs.15,000
- 2.1st Claimant awarded service pay of Kshs.30,000
- 3.1st Claimant awarded house allowance of Kshs.108,000
- 4.1st Claimant awarded 6 months' salary as compensation for unlawful termination of Kshs.90,000, totalling Kshs.243,000
- 5.1st Claimant to be issued a certificate of service
- 6.2nd Claimant awarded 1 month salary in lieu of notice of Kshs.9,500
- 7.2nd Claimant awarded underpayment based on the minimum wage of Kshs.66,000
- 8.2nd Claimant awarded service pay of Kshs.114,000
- 9.2nd Claimant awarded house allowance of Kshs.34,200
- 10.2nd Claimant awarded 6 months' compensation for unlawful termination of Kshs.57,000, totalling Kshs.280,000
- 11.2nd Claimant to be issued a certificate of service
- 12.Respondents to pay costs of this suit for both Claimants
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and labour relations jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court over claims of unlawful and unfair termination and terminal benefits
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Michael Edmunt Arochi & another v Memusi Academy [2015] KEELRC 796 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Cause No. 777 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/796/eng@2015-06-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.