Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedCause 146 of 2017· [2019] KEELRC 9 (KLR)

Nathan Lumumba v Press Master Limited & another [2019] KEELRC 9 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
18 December 2019
HWHellen S. Wasilwa
1,481 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court upheld an employee's dismissal because he admitted his mistake at a disciplinary meeting, awarding him only unpaid leave allowance.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, a long-serving employee of Press Master Limited, was summarily dismissed on 22 October 2016 following the delivery of improperly glued products to a customer. He filed a claim for unlawful dismissal on account of redundancy and non-payment of terminal dues, seeking Kshs. 1,188,000/-, costs, interest and a certificate of service. The Respondents contended that the Claimant, head of the Gluing Department, failed to supervise his employees, admitted the error in a show cause reply and before a disciplinary committee, and was lawfully dismissed for gross misconduct. The court framed three issues: validity of reasons for dismissal, procedural fairness, and entitlement to remedies. On the evidence, including the dismissal letter and minutes of the 22 October 2016 meeting, the court found the Claimant had admitted the improper gluing mistake, establishing a valid reason for dismissal. It further found due process was followed, as the Claimant admitted attending the meeting that canvassed the matter. The court dismissed the claim as lacking merit, save for an award of the Claimant's leave allowance for three years, Kshs. 73,560/-. No order of costs was made. The authorities cited by the parties on employee representation and burden of proof were not expressly adopted in the court's reasoning.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether there were valid reasons to warrant dismissal of the Claimant

Holding

A valid reason existed: the Claimant admitted in the 22/10/2016 minutes that the improper gluing mistake was his.

Reasoning

The court examined the dismissal letter dated 22.10.2016 which cited failure to follow the terms of the employment contract, company policy and personal duties. The Respondent referenced previous warnings but did not annex the warning letters. However, the minutes of the 22/10/2016 meeting, in which the Claimant was a participant, recorded his admission that the improper gluing mistake was his. On that basis the court found a valid reason to dismiss the Claimant.

p. 3
02

Whether due process was followed before the Claimant was dismissed

Holding

Due process was followed since the Claimant attended the 22/10/2016 meeting.

Reasoning

The Claimant admitted he attended the meeting of 22/10/2016 which canvassed the show cause letter, his reply and the suspension. The court treated that participation as sufficient compliance with due process, notwithstanding the Claimant's submission that he was not allowed to be accompanied by a representative and had only one day to respond to the show cause letter. The dismissal was therefore held fair and justified.

p. 3
03

Whether the Claimant is entitled to remedies sought

Holding

The claim was dismissed except for an award of leave allowance for 3 years of Kshs. 73,560/-.

Reasoning

Having found valid reasons and due process, the court found the claim without merit and dismissed it. However, the court carved out an award of leave allowance for 3 years, calculated as 24,510 x 3 = 73,560/-. The Respondent's submissions that the Claimant was not entitled to notice pay (having pleaded summary dismissal) and to service pay (being an NSSF member) were consistent with the limited award.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where an employee admits the mistake of improper work in a disciplinary meeting he participated in, due process is taken to have been followed and the dismissal is fair and justified.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Claim dismissed as lacking merit, save for an award of the Claimant's leave allowance for 3 years: 24,510 x 3 = Kshs. 73,560/-
  2. 2.No order of costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 41(1)
  • Employment ActSection 48
  • Employment ActSection 47(5)
  • Employment ActSection 43

Cases cited (3)

  • David Gichana Omuya v Mombasa Maize Millers Limited
    [2014] eKLR
  • Lucy Nyambura v Avenue Group
    [2019] eKLR
  • Reuben Ikatwa & 17 Others v Commanding Officer British Army Training Unit Kenya & another
    [2017] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court established under Article 162(2) of the Constitution (court's own jurisdiction; no specific provision quoted in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Nathan Lumumba v Press Master Limited & another [2019] KEELRC 9 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Cause 146 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/9/eng@2019-12-18

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