Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in judgment· [2019] KEELRC 1975 (KLR)

Elijah Oyoo Okoth v Vice Chancellor Karatina Univesity & another [2019] KEELRC 1975 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
26 March 2019
NMNzioki wa Makau
1,969 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court dismissed a lecturer's Kshs. 88.8 million unfair dismissal claim, ruling his disciplinary hearing was fair because he was fully heard and appealed with a lawyer.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, a lecturer employed on 8th April 2013 and confirmed on 1st October 2014, sued the Respondents alleging unfair and unlawful summary dismissal. He contended he was dismissed on 21st September 2016 following disciplinary proceedings on charges of soliciting money from students, in which he was denied the chance to cross-examine his accuser, was unrepresented, and faced a predetermined outcome. He sought notice pay, compensation and damages totalling approximately Kshs. 88.8 million, plus a certificate of service. The Respondents maintained the dismissal was substantively and procedurally fair, that the Claimant solicited money from students, was heard and appealed. Both parties testified through the Claimant and Ann Mumbi, and filed submissions citing Section 41 of the Employment Act and various authorities. The court found the Claimant had admitted receiving Kshs. 40,000/- from a student, knew the accusations, responded in writing and orally before a committee chaired by the Vice Chancellor, was present when his accuser testified, and appealed with counsel. The court held he was heard extensively and the dismissal accorded with the law; a misquoted clause in one letter did not invalidate the dismissal. The court declined to determine the unpleaded discrimination issue, rejecting the Claimant's authority. The suit was dismissed with costs to the Respondents. Judgment was delivered at Nyeri on 26th March 2019 by Nzioki wa Makau J.

Key legal issues

#
01

Procedural fairness under Section 41 of the Employment Act

Holding

The Claimant was afforded a fair hearing; the dismissal accorded with the law

Reasoning

The court found the Claimant knew the accusations in the letter of 1st September 2016, responded in writing and appeared before the committee chaired by the Vice Chancellor. He was present when his accuser testified and made final remarks. He also appealed with counsel. Evidence of some recanted accusations did not render the process unfair as the remaining claims justified dismissal.

p. 3
02

Whether the court may determine an unpleaded issue

Holding

The court declined to follow the authority permitting determination of unpleaded issues

Reasoning

The Claimant relied on a decision of Onyango J. allowing evidence on unpleaded issues. The court was not persuaded by that authority, rejecting the invitation to determine the unpleaded discrimination issue.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where an employee is heard extensively both orally and in writing, a misquotation of the applicable disciplinary clause in one letter does not render the dismissal unlawful

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Dismissal of the suit
  2. 2.Costs to the Respondents

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 41

Cases cited (8)

  • Standard Group Limited v Jenny Luesby
    [2018] eKLR
  • Mary Chemweno Kiptui v Kenya Pipeline Company Limited
    [2014] eKLR
  • Nairne v Highland Fire Brigade
    [1989] I.R.L.R. 366
  • Ezekiel Nyangoya Okemwa v Kenya Marine & Fisheries Research Institute
    [2016] eKLR
  • Kenya Union of Commercial Food & Allied Workers v National Cereals & Produce Board, Kisumu E&LRC Cause No. 117 of 2014 & 118 of 2014
    unreported
  • John Kisaka Masoni v Nzoia Sugar Co. Limited
    [2016] eKLR
  • John Rioba Maugo v Riley Falcon Security Services Limited
    [2016] eKLR
  • CMC Aviation Limited v Mohammed Noor
    [2015] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act (Section 41 relied on)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Elijah Oyoo Okoth v Vice Chancellor Karatina Univesity & another [2019] KEELRC 1975 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/1975/eng@2019-03-26

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