Justus Masinde Barasa v Metal Crowns Limited [2018] KEELRC 1141 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled an employer's dismissal unfair because it skipped the disciplinary hearing and documentation the Employment Act requires, awarding ten months' salary.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Procedural fairness in termination of employment
The termination was procedurally unfair because the claimant was not called to a disciplinary hearing and was not confronted with the accusations against him.
The court found no evidence that the claimant was called for a disciplinary hearing before dismissal. The termination letter cited only unsatisfactory performance and did not list other accusations such as sleeping on the job, and there was no proof the claimant was confronted with them. Although the respondent's witness said the claimant responded to a show cause letter, no such response was produced in evidence. The warning letters' receipt by the claimant was also unproved, the suspension letter's acknowledgement portion being unsigned.
Validity of the reason for termination
The respondent may have had a valid and justifiable reason for the termination, but that did not cure the procedural defects.
The court accepted that poor performance and sleeping during working hours could constitute valid grounds, as the claimant conceded his role as supervisor carried responsibility for diligence. However, the manner of communicating the reasons and handling the separation did not meet the Employment Act's requirements, so the termination was declared unfair on procedural grounds and compensation followed.
Legal principles established
#- Even where an employer has a valid reason for termination, failure to follow fair procedure under the Employment Act renders the termination unfair.
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that the termination of the claimant's services was unfair
- 2.Award of ten months' salary as compensation for unfair termination, Kshs 682,860/=, in addition to terminal dues offered in the termination letter dated 4th February, 2012 if not already paid
- 3.Award subject to statutory deductions
- 4.Interest on the award at court rates from the date of judgment
- 5.Claimant to have costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act (employment dispute)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Justus Masinde Barasa v Metal Crowns Limited [2018] KEELRC 1141 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Cause 732 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/1141/eng@2018-09-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.