Kamau v Eldoret Water and Sanitation Company Limited (Cause 28 of 2019) [2023] KEELRC 978 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court upheld a dismissal where the employer proved valid fraud-related reasons and followed fair disciplinary procedure, dismissing the employee's claim with costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Respondent had valid reasons to terminate the Claimant's employment
Yes - the audit and forensic investigation gave valid reasons under Section 43
The Claimant conceded that someone accessed his password and used his profile to access the system, compromising it and causing loss of funds. An internal audit established a loss of Kshs 2,215,501 with uploaded payments missing from the Safaricom site, and a forensic audit recommended that the Claimant be held responsible for the wrong entries. The court held these constituted valid grounds, relying on Thomas Sila Nzivo v Bamburi Cement Limited that reasonable and sufficient grounds suffice.
Whether the termination followed fair procedure under Section 41
Yes - show cause, responses and disciplinary hearings with adequate notice satisfied Section 41
The record showed a show cause letter which the Claimant answered, further correspondence requiring explanations, and invitations to a disciplinary committee dated February 9, 2019 and March 13, 2018 in which the Claimant was told to bring witnesses and given adequate time to prepare. The court found nothing more the Respondent was required to do.
Whether the reliefs sought are merited
No - the claim fails and all reliefs are refused
Having found that the dismissal was grounded on a valid reason and that the process was procedurally fair, the court concluded that the Claimant was not entitled to any of the reliefs sought and dismissed the claim with costs.
Legal principles established
#- Before terminating an employee, an employer must prove valid reasons and follow the laid-down procedure under Sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act
- An employer need only have reasonable and sufficient grounds to suspect an employee of acting to its substantial detriment; conclusive proof is not required
Court orders
#- 1.The claim is dismissed with costs
- 2.It is so ordered
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act 2007
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kamau v Eldoret Water and Sanitation Company Limited (Cause 28 of 2019) [2023] KEELRC 978 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/978/eng@2023-04-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.