Roselyne Kiunga Riungu v Agriculture and Climate Risk Enterprise [2019] KEELRC 2593 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court ruled an employee's dismissal unfair because the employer fired her for minor, adequately explained infractions, awarding six months' salary.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity and proportionality of the reasons for termination
The infractions cited in the show cause letter were minor and adequately explained by the claimant, rendering the termination disproportionate and unfair
The show cause letter raised only two infractions: absence from office without informing the line manager, and turning her back and closing her eyes during a staff meeting. The claimant explained both: she informed her manager before stepping out, and the eye-closing was due to menstrual pain. The respondent produced no prior warnings, and other allegations (colleague complaints, dissatisfaction with a photoshoot) were not in the show cause letter. Termination was therefore disproportionate and unfair.
Unalleged grounds cannot sustain a termination
Allegations not included in the show cause letter, such as colleague complaints and director dissatisfaction, could not justify the termination
The respondent's witness admitted that complaints from staff and a director's dissatisfaction over a photoshoot were not contained in the show cause letter, and that no warning letters were issued over the occurrences. The court could therefore not rely on matters never put to the claimant to justify termination, and this supported the finding that the sanctioned infractions were minor and reasonably explained.
Legal principles established
#- The burden of proving or justifying the reasons for termination of employment rests on the employer, and the test is that of a reasonable employer
- A court will not normally interrogate a facially reasonable reason for termination but may assess whether termination was the most appropriate and proportionate remedy
Court orders
#- 1.Award of six months' salary, Kshs. 1,200,000/=, as compensation for unfair termination of service
- 2.No order for notice pay or terminal benefits as these were already paid
- 3.The award to be subject to taxes and statutory deductions but to attract interest at court rates until payment in full
- 4.Claimant to have costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over unfair termination of employment (Employment Act, 2007)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Roselyne Kiunga Riungu v Agriculture and Climate Risk Enterprise [2019] KEELRC 2593 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Cause No 2278 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/2593/eng@2019-11-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.