Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedCause No. 217 of 2015· [2016] KEELRC 829 (KLR)

Bramwel Airo Imbudila v Noble Conference Centre Limited [2016] KEELRC 829 (KLR)

Employment & Labour Relations Court of Kenya
19 July 2016
DMD. K. Njagi Marete
1,207 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kericho court dismissed a gardener's unfair termination claim, finding the employer's evidence more believable than the employee's.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant, a gardener earning Kshs. 8,500.00 on permanent and pensionable terms, sued the respondent alleging wrongful, unfair and unlawful summary dismissal by letter dated 16th April 2015, without notice and without an opportunity to be heard, in breach of the Employment Act, 2007 and the Constitution. He sought an award per a Labour Officer's assessment, a declaration of unlawful termination, general damages, payment of outstanding dues said to arise from underpayment, costs and interest. The respondent admitted the dismissal, asserting it followed a show-cause, disciplinary proceedings and an unsuccessful appeal, for gross misconduct, and sought dismissal of the claim with costs. The matter proceeded by written submissions, and the court framed three issues: lawfulness of the termination, entitlement to relief, and costs. The claimant attacked the authenticity of the disciplinary minutes (which post-dated the dismissal) and the respondent's payslips as forgeries, relying on authorities on the section 41 fairness requirements and the rejection of the at-will doctrine. The respondent invoked section 47(5), placing the burden of proving unfair termination on the employee. The court observed that the claimant was silent on the warning letters evidencing his workplace conduct, which cast a shadow on his claim, while the respondent's failure to address the document-authenticity allegations cast a shadow on her defence. On a balance of probabilities the court found the respondent's case more probable, held the termination lawful, held the claimant entitled to no relief, and dismissed the claim with costs to the respondent on 19th July 2016.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the claimant's termination was wrongful, unfair and unlawful

Holding

The court found the termination lawful, holding that the respondent's case was more probable on a balance of probabilities.

Reasoning

The claimant disclaimed the respondent's minutes and payslips as doctored, pointing out that dismissal preceded the show-cause meeting. The respondent relied on section 47(5) of the Employment Act to place the burden of proof on the claimant. The claimant was silent on the warning letters demonstrating his conduct at work, which cast a shadow on his claim; the respondent's case came out as finer and more probable.

p. 3
02

Whether the claimant is entitled to the relief sought

Holding

Having found lawful termination, the claimant was not entitled to any relief.

Reasoning

The entitlement to relief was contingent on a finding of unlawful, unfair or wrongful termination. The court having found the termination lawful, the claims for a declaration, general damages, terminal dues and the Labour Officer's assessment all fell away.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The burden of proving unfair termination or wrongful dismissal rests on the employee, while the burden of justifying the grounds for termination rests on the employer.
  • Where conflicting accounts are evenly balanced, the court determines the matter on a balance of probabilities and the more probable case prevails.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The claim is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the cause awarded to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment Actsection 41
  • Employment Act, 2007section 47(5)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010

Cases cited (2)

  • Alfonse Achanga Mwachanya vs Operation 680 Limited
    [2013] eKLR
  • Kabenge Mugo vs Syngenta East Africa Limited
    Industrial Cause Number 1476 of 2011
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 (unfair termination and wrongful dismissal claim)

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, "Bramwel Airo Imbudila v Noble Conference Centre Limited [2016] KEELRC 829 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Cause No. 217 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/829/eng@2016-07-19

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