Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2023] KEELRC 1724 (KLR)

Nguru v Cooperative Bank of Kenya Limited (Cause E044 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 1724 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
29 June 2023
1,136 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court refused to pause a banker's unfair termination case, ruling that a bank cannot gather new evidence after firing him to justify the dismissal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The respondent, Cooperative Bank of Kenya Limited, applied by notice of motion dated March 24, 2023 for a stay of further proceedings in the claimant's suit for compensation for alleged unfair termination, pending hearing of its appeal against a ruling delivered on July 22, 2022 which dismissed its application to compel the claimant to produce bank statements. The respondent argued that without those statements, said to show money received from Musti Investment Limited through another account, it would be deprived of its best evidence and its right to a hearing would be violated. The claimant opposed, contending there were no exceptional circumstances, that appeals should not be entertained piecemeal, and that documents not before the disciplinary process could not now be used to justify termination. Justice M. Mbarũ restated that stay of proceedings is a grave measure granted only in exceptional cases, applying the principles in David Morton Silverstein, Kenya Wildlife Service v James Mutembei, Global Tours & Travels and Pius Machafu Isindu. The court held that the reason(s) for termination must have been given at the time of the decision and cannot change with time; further evidence outside the disciplinary process would not serve justice where there is no counter-claim. The application dated March 24, 2023 was dismissed with costs to the claimant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Test for stay of proceedings

Holding

Stay of proceedings is a grave judicial action granted only in exceptional, most deserving cases; the test is high and stringent

Reasoning

The court applied the settled principle that stay of proceedings interferes with the right of a litigant to conduct litigation, impinging on access to justice, right to be heard without delay and fair trial. The discretion is exercisable on the facts of each case, weighing the need for expeditious disposal, arguability of the intended appeal, judicial time and expedition of the application.

p. 2
02

Relevance of evidence sought on appeal to the fairness of termination

Holding

The employer cannot rely on evidence obtained after termination to justify the dismissal; grounds for termination must exist at the time of the disciplinary decision

Reasoning

The termination had already occurred and its lawfulness turns on the reason(s) and process at the time of the decision, as required by sections 41, 43, 45 and 47(5) of the Employment Act. Documents not part of the disciplinary record cannot be introduced later, absent a counter-claim, to cure evidential gaps; allowing it would let the employer shift its case as the matter moves along.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Stay of proceedings should only issue in exceptional cases calling for special measures, as it impacts the right to expeditious hearing
  • In employment claims, the reason(s) for termination must have existed at the time of the decision to terminate and cannot change with time; the employer bears the burden of proving both valid reason and due process

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Application dated March 24, 2023 seeking stay of proceedings dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the application to the claimant

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSections 41, 43, 45, 47(5)
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court ActSection 3

Cases cited (4)

  • David Morton Silverstein v Atsango Chesoni
    (2002) eKLR
  • Kenya Wildlife Service v James Mutembei
    (2019) eKLR
  • Global Tours & Travels Limited; Nairobi HC Winding up Cause No. 43 of 2000
  • Pius Machafu Isindu v Lavington Security Guards Limited
    [2017] eKLR
On appeal from
Mombasa Court of Appeal
Civil Appeal No. E027 of 2023
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 3 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011 (discretionary power to regulate proceedings)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Nguru v Cooperative Bank of Kenya Limited (Cause E044 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 1724 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/1724/eng@2023-06-29

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