Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment (Amended Memorandum of Claim dated 4th May 2018)· [2023] KEELRC 16 (KLR)

Onduma v Bontana Hotel Nakuru t/a Rift Valley Adventures and Hotels (Cause 153 of 2015) [2023] KEELRC 16 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
19 January 2023
2,789 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court awarded a hotel worker over Kshs 786,000 after finding his summary dismissal unfair because he was never given a hearing.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, a laundry supervisor employed by the Respondent hotel from 2009 and a member of the KUDHEIHA union, claimed that his summary dismissal on 10th April 2015 was unfair and that he was underpaid contrary to the CBA. He sought a declaration of wrongful dismissal, termination benefits, three months' pay in lieu of notice, gratuity for six years, annual leave, 44 offi duty days, leave travelling allowance, underpayments and compensation under section 49(1)(c) of the Employment Act. The Respondent denied the claim, contending the termination was for poor performance after several warnings, that a disciplinary process was conducted through correspondence, and that the Claimant had not exhausted the CBA dispute-resolution mechanism. Its witness confirmed on cross-examination that the CBA provided a basic salary of Kshs 25,800 with 13% house allowance for the Claimant's cadre. The court found that although the Respondent levelled many complaints, the Claimant was never given an opportunity to be heard as required by section 41 of the Employment Act, was suspended for about four months contrary to the CBA's 14-day suspension limit, and was condemned unheard. It held the dismissal unfair and unjustified and awarded notice pay of Kshs 73,458, gratuity of Kshs 48,972, annual leave of Kshs 24,486, underpayments of Kshs 443,448 and compensation of eight months' salary (Kshs 195,888), totalling Kshs 786,252 less statutory deductions, with costs and interest to the Claimant. The offi duty and leave travelling allowance heads were not reflected in the final orders. Judgment was delivered on 19th January 2023 by Lady Justice Hellen Wasilwa.

Key legal issues

#
01

Procedural fairness under section 41 of the Employment Act

Holding

The dismissal was procedurally unfair as the Claimant was never given a hearing

Reasoning

The court examined the correspondence between the parties and found that although the Respondent levelled many complaints and issued warnings, the Claimant always responded, yet he was never accorded a disciplinary hearing before the summary dismissal of 10/4/2015. The CBA suspension/interdiction procedure (maximum 14 days with full pay pending investigations) was also not followed, the Claimant having been suspended from 10th January 2015 for about four months. Being condemned unheard rendered the dismissal unfair and unjustified.

p. 6
02

Substantive justification for the dismissal

Holding

No valid reason was established for the summary dismissal

Reasoning

The Respondent asserted poor performance and rudeness to a guest as reasons for dismissal. However, the dismissal letter cited an incident of 10/1/2015 (arrogance to a customer in room 235 and alleged overcharging) which the Claimant had explained, the hotel price list indicating the underpant charge at Kshs 450. No investigation or hearing preceded the dismissal, so no valid reasons were established, satisfying the unfairness test under sections 41 and 45 of the Employment Act.

p. 6
03

Entitlement to reliefs - notice, gratuity, underpayments and compensation

Holding

Claimant awarded notice pay, gratuity for 6 years, underpayments and 8 months' compensation

Reasoning

Having found the termination unfair, the court awarded three months' pay in lieu of notice, gratuity computed at 1/3 of salary plus 1/3 of house allowance per completed year under Article 27(b) of the CBA for 6 years, the pleaded underpayments of Kshs 443,448 (the CBA providing Kshs 25,800 basic salary with 13% house allowance, which the Respondent's own witness confirmed on cross-examination), and compensation of 8 months' salary under section 49(1)(c) of the Employment Act, using a monthly salary of Kshs 24,486.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • An employee must be given an opportunity to be heard before termination under section 41 of the Employment Act; failure renders dismissal unfair
  • The CBA's suspension/interdiction procedure must be followed; a 4-month suspension without pay contrary to the 14-day limit breaches the CBA
  • Summary dismissal without notice or hearing lacks valid reasons and is unfair

Court orders

#
  1. 1.3 months pay in lieu of notice of Kshs 73,458
  2. 2.Gratuity for 6 years under Article 27(b) of the CBA of Kshs 48,972
  3. 3.Annual leave of Kshs 24,486
  4. 4.Underpayments as pleaded of Kshs 443,448
  5. 5.Compensation equivalent to 8 months salary for unfair termination of Kshs 195,888
  6. 6.Total award of Kshs 786,252 less statutory deductions
  7. 7.Respondent to pay costs of the suit plus interest at Court rates from the date of judgment

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 41
  • Employment ActSection 45
  • Employment ActSection 47(5)
  • Employment ActSection 49(1)(c)
  • Employment ActSection 35
  • Legal Notice Number 207 of 1990House allowance at 15% of basic pay
  • Collective Bargaining Agreement (KUDHEIHA and Respondent)Article 10 (Suspension/Interdiction); Article 8 (warnings); clause 9 (termination); clause 9(b) and 27(b)(i); page 50 schedule (b)(1)

Cases cited (1)

  • Duke Onchiri Mose v Rosoga Investments Limited
    [2017] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Original employment and labour relations jurisdiction under the Employment Act and the CBA between the parties

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Onduma v Bontana Hotel Nakuru t/a Rift Valley Adventures and Hotels (Cause 153 of 2015) [2023] KEELRC 16 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in the judgment (Amended Memorandum of Claim dated 4th May 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/16/eng@2023-01-19

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