Meshack Onguti v Kenyatta National Hospital & 2 others [2018] KEELRC 469 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court ruled KNH lawfully retired its director after age 50, dismissing his multi-million shilling claim and the hospital's counterclaim.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Claimant's retirement was wrongful, unfair and unlawful
The retirement was lawful; all applicable instruments contemplated retirement without cause after age 50
The claimant was retired under the repealed Employment Act (1976), the KNH Terms and Conditions of Service, the Code of Regulations and the 1998 circular. All instruments allowed retirement after 50 without cause. The claimant held the Board secretary position only by virtue of being Director, so no security of tenure attached. No proof of unfair termination was advanced.
Whether the Claimant was entitled to the reliefs sought
None of the reliefs was granted
Reinstatement and specific performance failed because the applicable law had no reinstatement provision, the retirement ages had been attained, and the 3-year window under the Employment Act 2007 had lapsed. Compensation, severance, gratuity, notice pay and pension were unavailable on the applicable terms and facts. The defamation claim was unpleaded and unproven.
Whether the Respondent was entitled to its counterclaim of Kshs.76,652,465
The counterclaim was not proved
Neither of the Respondent's witnesses gave evidence supporting the specific amounts claimed. RW2 testified generally about the Tender Committee's role but made no specific mention of the amount claimed. The audit report and task force report were not produced in court.
Legal principles established
#- Under the Code of Regulations and related circular, an officer who has attained the age of 50 years may be required to retire by the Government at any time without assigning any cause.
- Parties are bound by their pleadings and the Court cannot award relief not pleaded.
- A claimant in defamation must prove that some person other than himself found the publication defamatory.
- Premature termination, even if unfair, does not entitle an employee to salary for the years taken away before mandatory retirement age.
Court orders
#- 1.The Claimant's claim is dismissed
- 2.The 1st Respondent's counterclaim of Kshs.76,652,465.00 is dismissed
- 3.Each party shall bear its own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and labour relations dispute under Article 162(2) of the Constitution (Employment and Labour Relations Court)
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.
- Kamande v Nairobi City Water & Sewerage Company Limited (Cause 612 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 927 (KLR)[2023] KEELRC 927 (KLR)24 Apr 2023
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Meshack Onguti v Kenyatta National Hospital & 2 others [2018] KEELRC 469 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Employment and Labour Relations Cause (Nairobi). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/469/eng@2018-12-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.