Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedCause Number 2439 of 2016· [2021] KEELRC 1690 (KLR)

Micah Gentunywa Ombongi v Laboratory and Allied Limited [2021] KEELRC 1690 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
25 May 2021
1,301 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled an employee's firing was unfair because the employer gave no valid reason and skipped the required hearing, awarding him over Kshs. 425,000.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, employed as a Sales Representative from June 2014 at a monthly salary rising to Kshs. 60,798, sued the Respondent alleging unfair termination on or about 30 August 2016 without notice, a show-cause letter, or a disciplinary hearing. He sought notice pay, leave pay, relocation allowance, service gratuity, 12 months' salary as compensation for unfair termination, costs and interest. The Respondent contended that one month's notice was issued and paid, the Claimant was heard, and all dues including leave were settled, asserting valid reason for termination. The Respondent's witness admitted there was no show-cause letter and no hearing, and that no details supported the alleged loss of trust and confidence. The Court found the Respondent failed to meet the fair-termination threshold under Sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act and did not discharge its evidential burden under Section 47(5). Termination was declared unfair in both substance and procedure. Compensation was fixed at 6 months' gross salary (Kshs. 364,788) rather than the 12 months sought, given the Claimant's modest 2-year service and other factors. Notice pay of Kshs. 60,798 was awarded, the alleged one-month notice not being proved. Leave pay was not pursued, having been paid; relocation allowance and service gratuity were declined for want of support, the Claimant being an N.S.S.F member. Costs and interest at court rates were awarded to the Claimant. Judgment dated 25 May 2021.

Key legal issues

#
01

Procedural and substantive fairness of termination

Holding

Termination was unfair for want of valid reason and fair procedure; the Claimant was not given a show-cause letter or a hearing

Reasoning

The Respondent's own witness admitted there was no letter to show cause and no hearing. The alleged reason, loss of trust and confidence, was not supported by any details or particulars. The Claimant's record was clean and he had recently been promoted, so he did not contribute to the decision to terminate. The Respondent failed to discharge its evidential burden under Section 47(5) of the Employment Act to justify termination.

p. 2
02

Notice of termination

Holding

No clear evidence of a valid one-month notice; notice pay of one month's salary awarded

Reasoning

The Respondent alleged a notice dated 29 July 2016, but the Claimant denied receipt and disputed the signature acknowledging receipt. Even if served, the letter was indicated as received on 18 August 2016, which would not amount to one month's notice before termination on or about 30 August 2016. The Claimant was therefore allowed notice pay at Kshs. 60,798.

p. 2
03

Quantum of compensation for unfair termination

Holding

Six months' gross salary awarded in lieu of the 12 months sought

Reasoning

In exercising discretion, the Court considered that the Claimant had worked only 2 years, was paid August salary and leave dues, and did not show how long he expected to continue working or whether he sought alternative employment. Mitigating factors included his recent promotion, clean record, and lack of contribution to the termination. Termination had both substantive and procedural imperfections, justifying 6 months' gross salary.

p. 2
04

Service pay/gratuity and relocation allowance

Holding

Both prayers declined

Reasoning

The Claimant confirmed under cross-examination that he was subscribed to the N.S.S.F, which bars a claim for service pay. He did not exhibit any contract, wage order or other instrument entitling him to gratuity. On relocation, he had no receipts and no relocation policy was exhibited, leaving the prayer without factual or legal support. Both prayers were accordingly declined.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An employer must satisfy the statutory threshold of fair termination under Sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act, including valid reason and fair procedure
  • The employer bears the evidential burden under Section 47(5) of the Employment Act to justify termination
  • Loss of trust and confidence must be supported by assigned reasons; mere assertion without details does not constitute valid reason

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Declaration that termination was unfair in both substance and procedure
  2. 2.Respondent to pay the Claimant equivalent of 6 months' gross salary in compensation for unfair termination at Kshs. 364,788
  3. 3.Respondent to pay notice pay equivalent of 1-month salary at Kshs. 60,798 (total Kshs. 425,586)
  4. 4.Costs to the Claimant
  5. 5.Interest allowed at court rates as prayed

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 41
  • Employment ActSection 43
  • Employment ActSection 45
  • Employment ActSection 47(5)
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes (Employment Act; claim for unfair termination)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Micah Gentunywa Ombongi v Laboratory and Allied Limited [2021] KEELRC 1690 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Cause Number 2439 of 2016. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/1690/eng@2021-05-25

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