Jackson Kanigia Myagah v University of Nairobi [2022] KEELRC 324 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment Court ruled the University of Nairobi unfairly ended a fixed-term contract and must pay the remaining salary, but refused unproven claims.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether termination was substantively justified
Respondent failed to prove a valid and fair reason; the circular was not produced and the grounds were contradictory
The Respondent alleged termination pursuant to Circular OP/CAB2/7A but did not avail a copy to the court. The circular predated the last contract renewal in 2015, and the Respondent's evidence contradicted itself between retirement age and the circular as the ground. On a balance of probabilities, the Respondent failed to demonstrate substantive justification under Sections 45 and 47(5) of the Employment Act.
Whether the procedure for termination was fair
Termination without notice or hearing breached Section 41
It was not disputed that the Claimant was not given any hearing. The termination letter took effect with immediate effect, without notice or compliance with Section 41 of the Employment Act. Termination was therefore procedurally unfair.
Whether the Claimant is entitled to payment for the remainder of the contract
Yes - the one-year fixed-term contract had no termination clause, so the Claimant had a reasonable expectation to serve until its expiry
Distinguishing cases refusing anticipatory benefits (which involved permanent and pensionable employees whose contracts had termination clauses), this was a one-year contract with no termination clause. The Claimant reasonably expected employment until the contract's end and is entitled to payment for the remainder of the contract.
Whether the Claimant proved underpayment and gratuity claims
Both claims declined for failure of proof
Underpayment is a claim for special damages requiring strict proof; the Claimant tendered no tabulation against Regulation of Wages Orders. Gratuity was neither pleaded nor proved, and none of the contracts provided for gratuity, gratuity being payable only where a contract or CBA so provides.
Legal principles established
#- A public institution cannot escape contractual liability by relying on a government circular; a circular cannot alter statutory provisions or render a contract illegal
- Termination must be both substantively justified and procedurally fair
- Special damages must be pleaded and strictly proved
Court orders
#- 1.Payment of gross salary for the remainder of the contract period Kshs.282,569/=
- 2.Respondent to issue the Claimant's Certificate of Service within 30 days
- 3.Costs of this suit to the Claimant
- 4.Interest at court rates from the date of judgment till payment in full
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 (unfair termination claim under Sections 43, 45, 47(5), 41 and 51(1))
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Omuyonga v Fast Security Services Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E137 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1513 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 1513 (KLR)23 May 2025
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jackson Kanigia Myagah v University of Nairobi [2022] KEELRC 324 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in excerpt (Cause filed 16th June 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/324/eng@2022-04-14
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.