Richard Kimeu Muthama v Systech Limited Kenya [2020] KEELRC 490 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court awarded an employee Kshs. 1 million after his employer fired him for poor performance without proving it or giving him a hearing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of the reason for termination (poor performance)
The termination was premised on invalid reasons because the Respondent failed to prove poor performance
The termination letter did not indicate what constituted poor performance. The employer was required to demonstrate what was expected of the Claimant and what he actually achieved. Relying on Jane Samba vs Ole Tukai Lodge, the court held that merely stating poor performance is insufficient; the onus lies on the employer, which failed to discharge it. No performance appraisals or records were produced.
Procedural fairness under Section 41 of the Employment Act
The Claimant was not accorded a hearing, rendering the termination procedurally unfair
Section 41 requires an employer to explain the reasons for contemplated termination in a language the employee understands and to hear and consider representations. The Respondent produced no evidence that any hearing was conducted before termination. The failure to afford the Claimant an opportunity to be heard rendered the termination unfair.
Unfairness under Section 45(2) of the Employment Act
Termination was unfair and unjustified for want of valid reasons and due process
Section 45(2) places the burden on the employer to prove that the reason for termination was valid, fair, and that fair procedure was followed. Having found neither valid reasons nor due process established, the court concluded the termination was unfair and unjustified, entitling the Claimant to remedies under Section 49.
Legal principles established
#- The burden of proving poor performance as a reason for termination lies on the employer, who must demonstrate the expected standards and actual performance
- Termination without a hearing under Section 41 of the Employment Act is procedurally unfair
- Termination is unfair where the employer fails to prove valid reason and fair procedure under Section 45(2)
Court orders
#- 1.1 month salary in lieu of notice of Kshs. 80,000/-
- 2.Salary for April 2016 of Kshs. 80,000/-
- 3.Service charge equivalent to 15 days salary for the year served of Kshs. 40,000/-
- 4.Compensation equivalent to 10 months' salary for unlawful termination of Kshs. 800,000/-
- 5.Total award of Kshs. 1,000,000/- less statutory deductions
- 6.Respondent to pay costs of the suit plus interest at court rates from the date of judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (employment dispute - unfair termination claim under the Employment Act, 2007)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Richard Kimeu Muthama v Systech Limited Kenya [2020] KEELRC 490 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Cause No. 1873 of 2016. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2020/490/eng@2020-09-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.