Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedMemorandum of Claim dated 13th May 2014, filed 19th May 2014· [2018] KEELRC 2387 (KLR)

Rose Mwita Boke v Naku Sacco Society Limited [2018] KEELRC 2387 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
16 February 2018
1,253 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

#

Kenyan employers who lack written employment contracts and ignore desertion procedures will lose unfair dismissal cases and pay compensation plus costs.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant sued for unfair termination of employment, alleging she was employed as a teller from October 2010 at Kshs. 20,000 per month and was told to go home on 5th October 2012 after refusing to disclose the strong room security code to the Respondent's officials. The Respondent admitted employing her from May 2012 on internship/probation terms and asserted she was caught interfering with its banking system and thereafter deserted duty. The court framed three issues: the nature of the employment, whether there was desertion or unlawful dismissal, and entitlement to remedies. Finding no written proof of probationary employment (which by law must be in writing) and noting the Respondent's CEO admitted in cross-examination that the Claimant was a permanent employee, the court invoked Section 10(7) of the Employment Act, 2007 and adopted October 2010 as the employment start date. On desertion, the court applied the settled principle that an employer must demonstrate efforts to find a deserting employee and put her on notice; no specific efforts were evidenced. No investigation report substantiated the banking-system allegations, and the officials involved were not called as witnesses. The court found the Claimant was unlawfully and unfairly dismissed. Claims for August and September 2012 salary, severance pay and service pay were abandoned at trial. The court awarded six months' salary as compensation (Kshs. 120,000), one month's notice pay (Kshs. 20,000) and two years' leave pay (Kshs. 28,000), less a Kshs. 26,000 loan balance, totalling Kshs. 142,000, with interest at court rates from the date of judgment, a certificate of service and costs to the Claimant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Nature of the Claimant's employment (probation or permanent)

Holding

The court rejected the Respondent's claim of probationary employment, found the employment commenced October 2010 and that the Claimant was a permanent employee

Reasoning

Probationary employment must be in writing under Section 2 of the Employment Act, 2007. Since no letter of appointment was issued, the court invoked Section 10(7) and adopted the Claimant's pleaded start date of October 2010. The Respondent's CEO further admitted in cross-examination that the Claimant was a permanent employee.

p. 2
02

Whether the Claimant deserted duty or was unlawfully dismissed

Holding

The court found unlawful and unfair dismissal, rejecting the desertion and banking-system manipulation allegations

Reasoning

The employer produced no evidence of specific efforts to trace the allegedly deserting employee and put her on notice, as required by the settled law on desertion. No investigation report was produced to substantiate the allegation of interference with the banking system, and the officials said to have confronted the Claimant were not called as witnesses. The court believed the Claimant's testimony.

p. 2
03

Entitlement to remedies

Holding

Six months' salary compensation, one month's notice pay, leave pay for 2 years, certificate of service and costs awarded

Reasoning

In fixing compensation at six months' salary, the court considered the Claimant's length of service and the Respondent's conduct prior to dismissal. Leave pay was allowed in the absence of leave records, and salary for 5 days in October 2012 was awarded.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The responsibility for documenting the employment relationship lies with the employer; failing this, the court may invoke Section 10(7) of the Employment Act and adopt the employee's testimony on terms of employment
  • An employer relying on desertion to justify dismissal must demonstrate the efforts made towards finding the deserting employee and at the very least put the employee on notice that dismissal is being considered

Court orders

#
  1. 1.6 months' salary in compensation for unlawful dismissal (Kshs. 120,000)
  2. 2.1 month's salary in lieu of notice (Kshs. 20,000)
  3. 3.Leave pay for 2 years (Kshs. 28,000)
  4. 4.Less loan balance owed by the Claimant (Kshs. 26,000), net amount payable Kshs. 142,000
  5. 5.Interest at court rates from the date of delivery of judgment until payment in full
  6. 6.Claimant entitled to a certificate of service
  7. 7.Costs of the case to the Claimant
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over unfair termination claims under the Employment Act, 2007

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Rose Mwita Boke v Naku Sacco Society Limited [2018] KEELRC 2387 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Memorandum of Claim dated 13th May 2014, filed 19th May 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/2387/eng@2018-02-16

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