Boniface Muhatia v Uba Kenya Bank Limited [2021] KEELRC 2096 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that quietly outsourcing an employee without their consent counts as unfair dismissal, making the original employer pay compensation.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Identity of the employer during the contested period 2010-2013
The Claimant remained the Respondent's employee throughout; payment of salary from the MDs' personal accounts without notice to the Claimant did not terminate his contract with the Respondent.
The Claimant worked on the Respondent's premises driving the Respondent's motor vehicles assigned to its Managing Directors. The Respondent never communicated any change in employer or terms. The Respondent's letter of 27th May 2013 acknowledged the Claimant's disengagement from the Bank and offered terminal dues, confirming the employment relationship. The outsourcing was done without the Claimant's knowledge or acceptance and could not absolve the Respondent.
Whether the termination was unfair
An unlawful termination took place and the Respondent is liable; the outsourcing amounted to a termination without due process.
The Respondent did not demonstrate adherence to best practice in outsourcing. The Claimant was unaware his services were being outsourced. The employer was bound to notify him and settle his terminal dues at the time. Failing that, the outsourcing was tantamount to a termination and, being without fair procedure, was unlawful.
Overtime claim
The blanket claim for 18½ hours overtime daily for 3 years and 10 months failed; only one month's overtime of 15 hours was awarded.
The Claimant's evidence, an entry-exit register excerpt for one day, did not prove he worked overtime every day for the entire period. The entry was unclear as to time in and whether time out was 10.00am or 10.00pm. The claim as framed was not proved on a balance of probabilities.
Legal principles established
#- An employer who outsources an employee's services without the employee's express acceptance and without settling accrued obligations effects a termination and remains liable for unlawful termination.
- Where an employer changes an employee's mode or source of payment without notice, the employment contract with the original employer is not terminated.
Court orders
#- 1.One month's salary in lieu of notice – Kshs. 18,461.54
- 2.Severance pay @15 days for each year worked – Kshs. 36,923.08
- 3.15 hours overtime – Kshs. 769.23
- 4.Compensation for unlawful dismissal – 6 months' salary, Kshs. 110,769.24
- 5.Costs of the suit
- 6.Certificate of service for the years 2009-2013
- 7.Interest at Court rates on the sums in i), ii) and iii) above from date of filing suit till payment in full
- 8.Interest at Court rates on the sum in iv) above from date of judgment till payment in full
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment and labour relations claims (Employment Act; claim for unfair dismissal)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (3)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Nyagonchoga v Lavington Security Limited (Appeal E203 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2647 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 2647 (KLR)26 Sept 2025
- Nyagonchoga v Lavington Security Limited (Appeal E203 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2647 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 2647 (KLR)26 Sept 2025
- Wamwangi v Robert Bosch East Africa (Cause E689 of 2020) [2023] KEELRC 2916 (KLR)[2023] KEELRC 2916 (KLR)10 Nov 2023
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Boniface Muhatia v Uba Kenya Bank Limited [2021] KEELRC 2096 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the excerpt provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/2096/eng@2021-02-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.