Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedCause No E114 of 2021· [2023] KEELRC 3001 (KLR)

Mbithi v Mbilika & 3 others (Sued as the Committee Members of District Church Council Committee (AIC Muumandu DCC)) (Cause E114 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 3001 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
23 November 2023
3,019 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court dismissed a pastor's claim that his church employer forced him out, ruling he deserted the job instead.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, a Teaching Elder/Pastor employed by the Respondent church since 2007, sued for unlawful termination, seeking a declaration of unfair termination, one month's salary in lieu of notice, salary from November 2020 to his asserted retirement date of 8th September 2021, twelve months' compensation, costs and interest. He alleged constructive dismissal arising from a compulsory leave issued on 5th September 2020 following a dispute with Pastor Dorcas Mwanzia, and a retirement letter dated 17th September 2020 fixing retirement at 1st January 2021 based on his ID showing birth in 1951. The Respondent retracted the retirement letter after he produced a birth certificate, recalled him to duty on 4th October 2020, and terminated his employment on 4th November 2020 for desertion, salary having been paid only to 30th September 2020. The court framed two issues: whether the Claimant was constructively dismissed or absconded, and entitlement to reliefs. Applying the contractual approach in Western Excavating v Sharp and Coca Cola v Ligaga, the court held the compulsory leave was justified by the DCC minutes showing the Claimant's refusal to work with the Lady Pastor, and the retirement decision was not malicious. On desertion, the court applied Seabolo v Belgravia Hotel and Ronald Nyambu Daudi v Tornado Carriers, finding the Claimant's admitted refusal to resume duty and starting another church amounted to desertion. The suit was dismissed with each party bearing own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Claimant was constructively dismissed

Holding

Claimant failed to prove constructive dismissal on a balance of probabilities; the compulsory leave and retirement letter were justified

Reasoning

The court found from uncontradicted DCC minutes that the Claimant refused to work with Pastor Dorcas Mwanzia or compromise, justifying the compulsory leave. The retirement letter was based on the ID showing birth in 1951, was retracted upon production of a birth certificate, and the court found nothing malicious in the decision. The employer's conduct therefore did not amount to a repudiatory breach.

p. 6
02

Whether the Claimant deserted the workplace

Holding

The court found desertion proved by the Respondent

Reasoning

The Claimant admitted declining to resume duty on 4th October 2020 despite written requests, started a church (Cornerstone) rather than a mere fellowship, and applied for ministry affiliation. The Respondent wrote to him about the desertion. This was cogent evidence he had decided to leave and had already done so.

p. 7
03

Entitlement to reliefs

Holding

All reliefs refused and suit dismissed

Reasoning

Having found no constructive dismissal but desertion, the declaration and 12 months' compensation fell away; salary in lieu of notice was unsustainable; the claim for salary to the purported retirement date was anticipatory earnings with no established entitlement. The suit was dismissed in its entirety with each party bearing own costs.

p. 7

Legal principles established

#
  • The essential element of constructive dismissal is the employer's conduct which must leave the employee with no option but to quit
  • An employer alleging desertion must show efforts made to reach the employee and put them on notice that termination is under consideration

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The suit is dismissed
  2. 2.Parties shall bear own costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment Act
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 21 Rule 1
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159(2)(d); Article 48
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 1B

Cases cited (7)

  • Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd V Sharp
  • Coca Cola East & Central Africa Ltd V Maria Kagai Ligaga
  • Seabolo V Belgravia Hotel (1997) 6 BLLR 829 (CCMA)
    (1997) 6 BLLR 829 (CCMA)
  • Ronald Nyambu Daudi V Tornado Carriers Ltd (2019)
    (2019)
  • Simon Mbithi Mbane V Inter Security Services Ltd (2018) eKLR
    (2018) eKLR
  • Joseph Nzioka V Smart Coatings Ltd (2017) eKLR
    (2017) eKLR
  • Felistas Acheha Ikatwa V Charles Peter Otieno (2018) eKLR
    (2018) eKLR
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, "Mbithi v Mbilika & 3 others (Sued as the Committee Members of District Church Council Committee (AIC Muumandu DCC)) (Cause E114 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 3001 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Cause No E114 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/3001/eng@2023-11-23

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