Nyangweso v Roto Moulders Limited (Cause 437 of 2019) [2022] KEELRC 4147 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled a manager's firing for poor performance was unfair because the employer had no appraisals, targets or proper disciplinary process.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of the reason for termination
The Respondent did not establish valid and fair reasons for termination.
The employer produced shifting and inconsistent grounds: 21 broad areas of concern, then 4 on-the-spot disciplinary charges, then 9 reasons in the termination letter, none matching. There was no structured appraisal system, no show-cause letter, and no evidence supporting the charges. The Claimant's consistent salary increments, thanking him for his contribution, contradicted the alleged poor performance.
Procedural fairness of termination
Procedure was flawed under Section 41 of the Employment Act.
There was no letter to show cause and no charges preceding the disciplinary hearing. Charges were raised on the floor of the hearing, not specifically put to the Claimant with an answer recorded on each, and no evidence supported the accusations.
Discrimination claim
Claim fails for lack of evidence.
The Claimant was dismissed for his role as Country Sales Manager and could not compare himself with subordinates who did not share his role; no evidence of discrimination was adduced.
Legal principles established
#- Good performance is an implied term of every contract of employment even absent an express clause.
- An employer must establish valid and fair reasons under Sections 43, 45 and 47 of the Employment Act and follow fair procedure under Section 41, including a show-cause letter and specific charges put to the employee.
- An employer relying on poor performance must have a structured performance appraisal system, job description, targets and performance improvement plan against which the employee's performance is weighed.
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that termination was unfair
- 2.The Respondent shall pay the Claimant 5½ months' salary in compensation for unfair termination at Kshs 1,921,040
- 3.Costs to the Claimant
- 4.Interest at court rates from the date of Judgment till payment is made in full
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes under Sections 41, 43, 45 and 47 of the Employment Act, 2007
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nyangweso v Roto Moulders Limited (Cause 437 of 2019) [2022] KEELRC 4147 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in the judgment excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/4147/eng@2022-09-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.