Christopher Omutubachi v Metalic Crowns Limited [2018] KEELRC 422 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employer that fired a worker without a proper hearing was ordered to pay compensation, and had to prove the dismissal was fair once the employee raised doubt.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the termination of the claimant's employment was wrongful, unfair and unlawful
The termination was unlawful for want of substantive and procedural fairness; the claimant established a probable case of unfair termination, shifting the burden to the respondent who failed to justify the grounds with evidence of disciplinary proceedings.
The court rejected the respondent's invocation of section 47(5) of the Employment Act as an absolute shield, holding that the employee need only lay a probable case of unlawful termination to shift the burden of justification to the employer. The claimant demonstrated lack of procedural fairness, having been forced to sign discharge documents without a hearing as required under section 41, and the reason for termination - neglect of duty by leaving his machine running - was not substantiated by any disciplinary record. The respondent also failed to show prior warnings or an opportunity to improve performance.
Whether the claimant is entitled to the relief sought
Having succeeded on unlawful termination, the claimant was awarded eight months' salary as compensation for unlawful termination.
The court held that winning on unlawful termination entitled the claimant to relief, but exercised discretion to award eight months' compensation (Kshs. 260,712.00) rather than the twelve months claimed in lieu of notice and as compensation for disturbance. Other heads of claim - leave, arrears, severance, damages, bank loan settlement - were not granted.
Who bears the costs of the claim
Costs were awarded to the claimant against the respondent.
The claimant succeeded in the suit, so costs followed the event and were borne by the respondent.
Legal principles established
#- The burden of proving unfair termination is not rigid; once the employee lays down a probable case of unlawful termination, the burden shifts to the employer to justify the termination.
- An employer who fails to adduce evidence of disciplinary proceedings cannot justify a termination; the grounds must be supported by law and precedent.
Court orders
#- 1.Eight (8) months compensation for unlawful termination of employment at Kshs. 32,589.00 per month, totalling Kshs. 260,712.00
- 2.The costs of the claim to be borne by the respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes (Employment Act, 2007; employment relationship between the parties)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Christopher Omutubachi v Metalic Crowns Limited [2018] KEELRC 422 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Cause No. 1811 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/422/eng@2018-12-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.