Nabwera & another v Kenya Meat Commission (Petition 59 & 60 of 2018 (Consolidated)) [2022] KEELRC 1624 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that repeatedly renewing fixed-term contracts for nearly a decade creates an expectation of renewal, making non-renewal unfair termination worth compensation.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether Petitioners were eligible for Voluntary Early Retirement or redundancy and were discriminated against
They were not eligible and were not treated discriminatively; declaratory orders on this limb declined
Both Petitioners held managerial positions - the 1st as Acting Company Secretary, the 2nd as Depots Supervisor Nairobi - and were non-unionisable. The 1st Petitioner's own sworn Replying Affidavit in Cause No. 2262 of 2015 confirmed the Staff Rationalization Program involved only unionisable staff. Taking a contrary position in these Petitions was unjustified.
Whether termination of the Petitioners' fixed-term contracts was unfair
Termination was unfair; legitimate expectation of renewal arose from serial renewals over 9-10 years
Contracts had been renewed without fail since 2006 and 2007, and renewals came with assurances of improved terms. The 1st Petitioner's career was on an upward trajectory and she was retained to defend litigation; the non-renewal reasons proffered were shifting and unproven. Expiry of time was not a valid reason given legitimate expectation; the employer failed to justify termination.
Whether constitutional remedies were available
No; the dispute implicates contractual and statutory violations adequately remedied under the Employment Act, 2007
The Court found the appropriate framework was statutory employment law. Compensation for unfair termination under the Employment Act was adequate and effective; there was no justification for resort to the Constitution or for constitutional damages.
What compensation the Petitioners merit
9 months' gross salary (Kshs. 774,000) for the 1st Petitioner and 10 months' (Kshs. 860,000) for the 2nd, on gross monthly salary of Kshs. 86,000
Both had long unblemished service and were routinely promoted; neither contributed to the termination nor proved mitigation. The 1st Petitioner did not prove her 2012 salary persisted to 2016 and pleaded no specific sum, so the Court adopted the gross salary of Kshs. 86,000 quoted in the pleadings.
Legal principles established
#- An employer's decision not to renew a fixed-term contract may be challenged where there is legitimate expectation of renewal, improper motive, or countervailing circumstances
- Long serial renewal of fixed-term contracts over 9-10 years, coupled with assurances of improved terms, gives rise to legitimate expectation of renewal, making non-renewal unfair termination
- Expiry of contractual periods was not a valid reason for termination in the circumstances; the burden was on the employer to show valid reasons
Court orders
#- 1.It is declared that termination of the Petitioners' contracts of employment was unfair
- 2.The Respondent shall pay the 1st Petitioner compensation for unfair termination equivalent of her 9 months' gross salary at Kshs. 774,000
- 3.The Respondent shall pay the 2nd Petitioner compensation for unfair termination equivalent of his 10 months' gross salary at Kshs. 860,000
- 4.Costs to the Petitioners
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Concurrent constitutional and statutory employment jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court over consolidated petitions filed 26th June 2018
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nabwera & another v Kenya Meat Commission (Petition 59 & 60 of 2018 (Consolidated)) [2022] KEELRC 1624 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Petition No. 59 of 2018 (consolidated with Petition No. 60 of 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/1624/eng@2022-05-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.