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 the judgment· [2021] KEELRC 1098 (KLR)

Charles John Macharia Mbuthia v Standard Chartered Bank Kenya Limited [2021] KEELRC 1098 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
13 August 2021
MOMaureen Onyango
2,986 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan employment court refused to step aside from a case, ruling that a judge's old professional ties don't prove bias.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, who had sued the Respondent for unfair dismissal, brought a Notice of Motion dated 29 January 2021 seeking the recusal of Maureen Onyango J (also the Principal Judge) from hearing the suit, invoking Articles 50(1) and 25(c) of the Constitution and the Judicial Service Code of Conduct and Ethics. The Claimant alleged a 'triangular interconnectedness' between the Judge, the Respondent's counsel Geoffrey Obura and the late Harrison Okeche, the Respondent's former Head of Employee Relations who had presided over the dismissal later overturned internally. The grounds were that the Judge and the late Okeche had worked together at the Federation of Kenya Employers, appeared together at a 2016 LSK CPD seminar, that the Judge and Mr Obura had been appointed together to two taskforces and the Industrial Court Rules Board over 15 years earlier, and that the Judge attended the deceased's funeral. The Respondent opposed, saying the application was forum shopping and that the deceased acted in his professional capacity. The court set out Regulation 21(1) of the Judicial Service (Code of Conduct and Ethics) Regulations, 2020 and went through each ground, finding none applicable to her. She explained the file reached her through ordinary assignment when prior handlers were due for transfer, and that no party had objected earlier. Relying on Kaplan & Stratton, Wavinya Ndeti and Nathan Obwana, she held that acquaintance and mere apprehension do not establish probable bias, which must be proved by facts. She found the allegation that the court allocated itself the file demeaning and not made in good faith, dismissed the application with costs on 13 August 2021, with delivery via video conferencing under COVID-19 directions.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether prior professional and social associations between the Judge and the Respondent's former personnel and counsel establish grounds for recusal

Holding

No. Working with the deceased at FKE, attending his funeral, joint appointments to taskforces over 15 years ago, and shared CPD presentations do not establish bias or any ground under Regulation 21(1).

Reasoning

The Judge acknowledged the past associations but held they were historical, professional and personal, not evidencing actual or perceived bias. No relief was sought against the deceased, and no order would benefit the Judge or the deceased. The court relied on Kaplan & Stratton to note that disqualification based on mere acquaintance would have no end, and on Wavinya Ndeti that judges were once members of the bar.

p. 3
02

Whether the court allocated the matter to itself, evidencing bias

Holding

No. The file reached the Judge through the ordinary assignment process because the Judges previously handling the matter were due for transfer, and the parties never objected or requested assignment to another Judge.

Reasoning

The court traced the procedural history: the claim and applications were handled by the Duty Judge, Makau J and Radido J, who directed the file be placed before the Principal Judge for assignment. No party raised any objection to the Judge handling the matter at any point before the recusal application.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The proper test for recusal is the perception of fairness and the moral authority to hear the matter; allegations of probable bias must be proved by facts, and mere acquaintance between a Judge and counsel or a party's personnel is not a ground for disqualification

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Claimant's application for recusal is dismissed with costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Articles 50(1) and 25(c) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010; Rules 5 and 10(1) of the Judicial Service Code of Conduct and Ethics

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Charles John Macharia Mbuthia v Standard Chartered Bank Kenya Limited [2021] KEELRC 1098 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/1098/eng@2021-08-13

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