Kiilu v Standard Chartered Bank (K) Ltd (Cause 2191 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 2426 (KLR)

Sections 43 and 45(2)(a) and (b) of the Employment Act place the burden on the employer to prove reasons for termination, judged on the employer's genuine belief at termination on a balance of probability. The Claimant's own written statement, disciplinary hearing admissions, and cross-examination confirmed he knowingly stamped the deposit slip acknowledging an amount he had not received. His act was deliberate, not an inadvertent shortfall, and undermined the trust required of a bank teller.

Section 41 requires notification of allegations and a hearing in the presence of a fellow employee or union representative. The Claimant received a notification dated 15th March 2016 referencing the transaction of 25th February 2016, informing him of the date, time, venue, panelists and his right to be accompanied. He appeared before the panel and gave his side. The allegation that a panelist introduced a new issue failed because that issue did not form a reason for termination.

The Claimant did not provide better particulars of the alleged discrimination, nor demonstrate that he was treated differently and less favourably than counterparts in similar circumstances. Further, his case was not an ordinary shortfall recoverable from salary but the deliberate stamping of a deposit slip for an amount he knew he had not received, distinguishing it from the comparator incidents he relied on.