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. 15 of 2014· [2016] KEELRC 1679 (KLR)

Joseph Kipketer v SBI International Holdings Ag (KENYA) [2016] KEELRC 1679 (KLR)

Employment & Labour Relations Court of Kenya
17 February 2016
DMD. K. Njagi Marete
1,160 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 Kenyan court dismissed an unfair dismissal claim because the employee's own court documents contradicted his testimony, proving the employer followed proper procedure.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant, employed by the respondent as a Foreman from 2010, sued for unfair and/or wrongful dismissal following termination by letter dated 20th July 2014. He pleaded that he never received a show cause letter and never appeared before the respondent's Project Engineer on 27th June 2014, and sought declarations of unfair termination contrary to Sections 35(1)(c), 36, 41 and 43 of the Employment Act, 2007, plus notice pay, leave, July 2014 salary, twelve months' compensation, gratuity, costs and interest. The respondent denied the claim, asserting it issued a Notice to Show Cause on 27th June 2014, invited the claimant to a hearing on 30th June 2014, terminated lawfully after considering his defence, and paid June salary. The court framed three issues: lawfulness of termination, entitlement to relief, and costs. It found the claimant's pleaded case contradicted his own written submissions, which admitted receipt of the notice to show cause and explained his non-attendance at the disciplinary meeting. This contradiction destroyed his credibility. The respondent's evidence of due process stood uncontroverted by substantial evidence, and the court found the termination lawful. The second issue on relief consequently fell away as a non-issue. The claim was dismissed with costs to the respondent on 17th February 2016.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the termination was wrongful, unfair and unlawful for want of notice, notice of accusations and a fair hearing

Holding

The court found the termination lawful and procedurally sound, holding that due process was pursued by the respondent

Reasoning

The claimant pleaded he never received the show cause letter or appeared before the Project Engineer, but in submissions admitted receiving the notice to show cause on 27th June 2014 and signing it. The court treated this as a fatal contradiction undermining his credibility. The respondent's evidence of a show cause letter dated 27th June 2014, an invitation to a hearing on 30th June 2014 and a hearing at which the claimant's defence was considered stood uncontroverted by substantial evidence, supporting a finding of lawful termination.

p. 3
02

Whether the claimant was entitled to the relief sought

Holding

Not entitled; the claim for relief fell away with the finding of lawful termination

Reasoning

Having found lawful termination on the first issue, the court held the second issue of entitlement to notice pay, leave, salary, compensation and gratuity became moot and was not considered on its merits.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A party whose pleaded case contradicts his own submissions loses credibility and bears the risk of uncontroverted evidence from the opposing side

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Claim dismissed with costs to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment Act, 2007Section 35(1)(c)
  • Employment Act, 2007Section 36
  • Employment Act, 2007Section 41
  • Employment Act, 2007Section 43
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and labour relations jurisdiction of the Employment & Labour Relations Court (claim for unfair/wrongful termination under the Employment Act, 2007)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Joseph Kipketer v SBI International Holdings Ag (KENYA) [2016] KEELRC 1679 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Cause No. 15 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/1679/eng@2016-02-24

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