Rachel Mutheu Ndambuki v Cabinet Secretary, Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning & 2 others [2019] KEELRC 524 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court found Cabinet Secretary Farida Karoney in contempt for defying a transfer stay, but let her reverse the violation instead of going to jail.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether service of the conservatory order on the Chief State Counsel bound the Cabinet Secretary
Service on the Chief State Counsel, Ministry of Lands, was proper service on the Cabinet Secretary
The order of 22nd February 2019 was served upon J.W. Njogu, Deputy Chief State Counsel in the Ministry of Lands. The court reasoned that service on the Cabinet Secretary's Chief State Counsel was sufficient to bring the order to her attention and bind her, rejecting the argument that personal service on the Cabinet Secretary was required for contempt.
Whether the Cabinet Secretary disobeyed the conservatory order
The Cabinet Secretary was in contempt by transferring another officer to take over the Petitioner's position and allowing her office to be broken into and occupied
Despite the stay of the Petitioner's transfer, the 1st Respondent transferred Justice Kiprono Korir to Taita Taveta as Officer In-charge. During the Petitioner's maternity leave her office was broken into with the aid of local state apparatus and taken over forcibly. The court held it illogical to claim the transfer was not implemented; the Petitioner was effectively forcibly removed from her station in defiance of the order.
Whether immediate committal should issue or the contemnor be allowed to purge contempt
The Cabinet Secretary was given an opportunity to purge the contempt before sentencing
The court noted the aggravating actions took place while the Petitioner was on maternity leave and unable to confront the officer occupying her office. Protecting the court's dignity is achieved through compliance, not hasty sentencing; an opportunity to purge gives contemnors a chance to reconsider their path. Sentencing was deferred pending confirmation of compliance.
Legal principles established
#- Court orders are compulsive and binding; a party cannot choose which to obey or negotiate the manner of compliance
- Service of a court order on a Cabinet Secretary's Chief State Counsel constitutes proper service on the Cabinet Secretary
- A party cannot circumvent a conservatory order by filling the protected position with another officer
Court orders
#- 1.The 1st Respondent is found to be in Contempt of Court
- 2.The 1st Respondent is granted an opportunity to purge the contempt by reversing in writing the transfer of Justice Kiprono Korir as the Officer In-Charge, Survey Field Office – Taita Taveta
- 3.The 1st Respondent to communicate in writing to the Petitioner that she remains Officer In-Charge, Survey Field Office – Taita Taveta, until further orders of the Court
- 4.The 1st Respondent to ensure the Petitioner takes physical occupation of her office upon her return from maternity
- 5.Parties to move the Court as soon as practicable to confirm that the 1st Respondent has purged contempt, or to take a date for her sentencing
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Not expressly stated; contempt of court in a petition in which the court had issued interim conservatory orders
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Rachel Mutheu Ndambuki v Cabinet Secretary, Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning & 2 others [2019] KEELRC 524 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Petition No 2 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/524/eng@2019-10-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.