Shadrack Olindi Esikote v East African Packaging Industries Limited [2019] KEELRC 804 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court awarded a sacked employee over Kshs.636,000 because his employer never proved bribery claims or followed a fair disciplinary process.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Valid reasons for termination under Section 43
No valid reason was established for the summary dismissal under Section 44(4)(g); the bribery allegations were never proved
The dismissal letter did not state details of the misconduct. The show cause letter alleged receipt of bribes, but at the disciplinary hearing the accusers were not called and no evidence of the bribes was submitted. RW2 admitted no evidence of bribery was produced and that promised investigations were never done. The court held the employer failed to discharge the burden under Section 43 to prove valid reasons for termination.
Procedural fairness under Section 41
Due process was not followed; the hearing was incomplete, no witnesses were called, and the Claimant was terminated before the promised investigations
The minutes showed the disciplinary hearing was adjourned pending further investigation, which was never carried out. The accusers did not attend the hearing, and the Claimant was not given the evidence against him. Termination followed on 7th September 2015 without a concluded process, contrary to Section 41 of the Employment Act and the requirements of a fair hearing.
Unfair termination under Section 45(2) and remedies under Section 49
Termination was unfair both substantively and procedurally; compensation of 10 months' salary plus one month's notice pay was awarded
Applying Section 45(2), the employer failed to prove a valid and fair reason and fair procedure. Exercising discretion under Section 49, the court awarded 10 months' gross salary as compensation and one month's salary in lieu of notice, with costs and interest, notwithstanding the claim for the maximum 12 months.
Legal principles established
#- The employer bears the onus of proving valid reasons for termination and that a fair procedure was followed; failure on either limb renders termination unfair
- Where an employer does not call the accusers at a disciplinary hearing or in court and produces no evidence of the alleged misconduct, it has not demonstrated a valid reason for dismissal
- A disciplinary hearing adjourned for investigations that are never conducted, followed by termination, breaches the fair procedure required under Section 41 of the Employment Act
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that the Claimant was unfairly and unlawfully terminated
- 2.Award of 10 months' salary as compensation for unfair and unlawful termination (10 x 51,831 = Kshs.578,310/=)
- 3.Award of one month's salary in lieu of notice (Kshs.57,831/=)
- 4.Total judgment of Kshs.636,141/= entered for the Claimant
- 5.Respondent to bear costs of the suit plus interest at court rates with effect from the date of judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act 2007 (Sections 41, 43, 44, 45 and 49 applied)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Shadrack Olindi Esikote v East African Packaging Industries Limited [2019] KEELRC 804 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in the extract (Statement of Claim dated 16th October 2015). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/804/eng@2019-09-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.