Kizito v Young Women Christian Association of Kenya (Cause 1607 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 418 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court awarded a former union official six months' salary because her employer fired her unfairly and its key decision-maker never appeared to explain why.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether termination was for a valid reason and by fair procedure
Termination was not for a valid reason and procedure was unfair; the respondent violated its Human Resource Manual, Constitution and sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act
The claimant testified credibly of systemic undermining and a stage-managed disciplinary process by the National Chairperson, who was not called to testify. The HR Manager's evidence was largely hearsay and could not refute the claimant's account. On a balance of probability the court found no valid reason and no fair procedure, entitling the claimant to compensation under section 49(1)(c) and 4.
Whether the suit was compromised by an out-of-court settlement
Only the specific terminal dues items were settled; the suit was not fully compromised
There was no comprehensive agreement executed in full and final settlement. Payments covered notice pay, 5 days' salary for May 2017 and accrued leave; the Certificate of Service was also issued. Those items are spent, but the remaining heads of claim remained live for determination.
Quantum of compensation for unfair termination
Six months' salary (Kshs 2,370,000) awarded, plus unpaid half salary for April 2017 (Kshs 197,500)
Guided by Court of Appeal authority upholding awards of 12 months' salary, the court considered the claimant's about eight years of service, the unserved balance of a five-year renewable contract, the damage to her career and dignity, and that she did not materially contribute to her ouster, settling on six months' salary as appropriate compensation.
Legal principles established
#- A partial settlement of specific terminal dues does not compromise the entire suit unless expressly in full and final settlement
- Failure to call a key witness (the Chairperson who orchestrated the termination) weakens the employer's case; uncontradicted credible testimony may prove unfair termination
Court orders
#- 1.Kshs 2,370,000 in compensation for unlawful and unfair termination
- 2.Kshs 197,500 being unpaid half salary for the month of April, 2017
- 3.Interest at court rates from date of judgment till payment in full
- 4.Costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act (sections 41, 43, 45, 49) over unfair termination claims
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kizito v Young Women Christian Association of Kenya (Cause 1607 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 418 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). ELRC Cause No. 16 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/418/eng@2023-02-02
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.