Cevine Otieno Owino v Coast Bus (Msa) Limited [2019] KEELRC 701 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court awarded a bus conductor 12 months' salary because his employer fired him without a hearing or valid reason.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether termination was substantively and procedurally unfair
Termination was unfair both substantively and procedurally; the reason given was not valid and fair and no opportunity to be heard was accorded
The claim was undefended, so the claimant's averments stood uncontroverted. He established the employment relationship through payslips. The reasons in the termination letter (missing from work for 20 minutes, previous rudeness) did not constitute a valid and fair reason, and no hearing under section 41 of the Employment Act was conducted, contrary to the mandatory procedure confirmed in the Kenfreight case.
Whether the claimant is entitled to notice pay
Not entitled, having been given one month's notice under the termination letter
The court read the termination letter, which stated services would stop after a one-month notice period, as meaning notice was given. Notice pay under the claim was therefore unnecessary. The only remedy awarded was compensation under section 49 of the Employment Act.
Entitlement to compensation for unfair termination
Maximum compensation of 12 months' gross salary (Kshs.192,660) awarded
In assessing compensation under section 49, the court considered the claimant's long service of about 11 years, the respondent's failure to respond despite service, absence of other terminal benefits, and the circumstances of termination. The maximum of 12 months was awarded based on gross monthly pay of Kshs.16,055.
Legal principles established
#- In an undefended claim, the claimant must establish all the facts of the claim, including the existence of an employment relationship, before establishing unfair termination
- Failure by an employer to follow the mandatory procedure under section 41 of the Employment Act renders a termination unfair
Court orders
#- 1.A finding that the Claimant's termination was substantively and procedurally unfair
- 2.The Respondent to pay the Claimant maximum compensation of 12 months' salary in the sum of Kshs.192,660 (based on monthly gross pay of Kshs.16,055)
- 3.The Respondent to pay the Claimant's costs
- 4.The decretal sum to attract interest at court rates from the date of judgment
- 5.Refusal of payment in lieu of notice as the termination letter indicated one month's notice was given
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over unfair termination claims under the Employment Act (Sections 41, 43, 45, 49 cited)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Cevine Otieno Owino v Coast Bus (Msa) Limited [2019] KEELRC 701 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Statement of Claim dated 9th April 2018 (number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/701/eng@2019-10-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.