Jeremy Kirimi Rithaa v Technical University of Kenya [2020] KEELRC 1837 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan university was ordered to pay a lecturer Kshs. 4.47 million because it could not prove his dismissal was fair and justified.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the termination was unfair under Section 45(2) of the Employment Act
The termination was unfair as the Respondent, having filed no defence, failed to prove a valid reason and fair procedure
The matter proceeded exparte as the Respondent never filed a Response despite appearing. The Claimant testified that his salary was stopped, he demanded payment through counsel, and was instead issued a Notice to Show Cause and terminated. The disciplinary hearing minutes were never availed to the Court, so there was no proof of what transpired or that he was allowed to defend himself. Applying Section 45(2), the employer must prove valid reason, a fair reason, and fair procedure; none was shown.
Whether the procedural requirements of Section 41 of the Employment Act were met
The Respondent failed to follow the mandatory provisions of Section 41; the disciplinary hearing was unproven and possibly a sham
The Claimant alleged he responded to the Notice to Show Cause but the Respondent declined to receive his memoranda, and his representation at the hearing was not considered. The Minutes of the hearing of 5/5/2016 were never supplied to the Court despite his request. With no contrary evidence from the Respondent, the court found there was no evidence that he was subjected to a fair disciplinary process.
What remedies are due under Section 49 of the Employment Act
Notice pay, 18 months' salary arrears, 3 years' leave allowance, maximum 12 months' compensation, pension dues, costs and interest awarded
The court found for the Claimant on remedies, relying on Section 49. It awarded three months' salary in lieu of notice as offered in the termination letter but unpaid, 18 months of unpaid salary arrears from December 2014 to May 2016, leave allowance for three years, and the maximum 12 months' salary as compensation for the unfair termination, all subject to statutory deductions.
Legal principles established
#- An employer bears the burden of proving a valid and fair reason for termination and that a fair procedure was followed; failure to rebut an uncontroverted claim results in a finding of unfair termination
Court orders
#- 1.3 months' salary in lieu of notice (Kshs. 403,413)
- 2.Salary arrears for 18 months from December 2014 to May 2016 (Kshs. 2,420,478)
- 3.Leave allowance for 3 years (Kshs. 33,000)
- 4.Maximum 12 months' salary as compensation for unlawful and unfair termination (Kshs. 1,613,653)
- 5.Total award of Kshs. 4,470,543 less statutory deductions
- 6.Payment of the Claimant's pension dues
- 7.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 over the employment dispute; Employment Act, 2007 (Sections 41, 45(2) and 49) applied
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jeremy Kirimi Rithaa v Technical University of Kenya [2020] KEELRC 1837 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Cause No. 638 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2020/1837/eng@2020-01-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.