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. 181 of 2015· [2016] KEELRC 1375 (KLR)

Boiyo Kennedy Cheptang v Rai Plywoods (K) Ltd [2016] KEELRC 1375 (KLR)

Employment & Labour Relations Court of Kenya
15 April 2016
DMD. K. Njagi Marete
944 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Employment Court dismissed a worker's unfair termination claim because his employer kept proper records proving misconduct and a fair hearing.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant, employed by the respondent as a General Worker from 2002 on a salary of Kshs.18,000/-, sued for breach of contract of employment, alleging that his services were terminated without notice in October 2014 in a manner that was unfair, unprocedural and in violation of natural justice. He sought a declaration that the termination was malicious, unlawful and unprocedural, an award of Kshs.410,850/- as assessed by a Labour Officer on 19th June 2015, general damages, unpaid salary, payment of underpaid dues, and interest. The respondent denied the claim, asserting the claimant was dismissed for misconduct including stealing company property, forging documents, absenteeism and absconding, and that he was issued with a dismissal notice and accorded a fair hearing. The court framed three issues: whether the termination was wrongful, unfair and unlawful; entitlement to relief; and costs. Relying on section 47(5) of the Employment Act, the court found the respondent had discharged her burden of justifying the termination through documentary evidence - a show cause letter, the claimant's apology letter, disciplinary committee minutes and a dismissal letter - demonstrating both substantive grounds and procedural fairness. The claimant, by contrast, failed to demonstrate his case in evidence. On a preponderance of evidence, the court dismissed the claim with costs to the respondent. The remaining issues dissipated with that determination.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the termination was wrongful, unfair and unlawful

Holding

The termination was lawful; the respondent demonstrated both substantive grounds of misconduct and procedural fairness through documentary evidence

Reasoning

The respondent produced a show cause letter dated 8/10/2014, an apology letter from the claimant dated 9/10/2014, disciplinary committee minutes dated 10/10/2014 and a dismissal letter dated 23/10/2014, demonstrating compliance with due process. The claimant alleged unfair and unlawful termination but failed to demonstrate it in evidence, while the respondent's documentary proof was overwhelming. On a preponderance of evidence, the claim failed.

p. 3
02

Whether the claimant was entitled to the relief sought

Holding

Not entitled; the relief dissipated with the dismissal of the claim

Reasoning

Having found the termination lawful and fair, the declaratory relief, the award of Kshs.410,850/- assessed by the Labour Officer, general damages, unpaid salary and underpayment dues all fell away, as did interest and costs. The remaining issues dissipated with the determination on the termination.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Section 47(5) of the Employment Act places the burden of proving unfair termination on the employee, and the burden of justifying the grounds for termination on the employer
  • Civil claims are decided on a preponderance of evidence

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The claim is dismissed with costs to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 35(1)(c)
  • Employment ActSection 47(5)
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and labour relations jurisdiction (Employment and Labour Relations Court); claim for breach of contract of employment under the Employment Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Boiyo Kennedy Cheptang v Rai Plywoods (K) Ltd [2016] KEELRC 1375 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Cause No. 181 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/1375/eng@2016-04-15

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