Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNot stated in judgment· [2024] KEELRC 1424 (KLR)

Methodist Church in Kenya Trustees Registered & another v Maso (Cause E005 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 1424 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
16 May 2024
3,827 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~15 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court confirmed employers can transfer staff freely, and ruled an unsigned, undated affidavit counts for nothing, granting the Methodist Church interim orders.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimants, the Methodist Church in Kenya and its Presiding Bishop, moved the court by notice of motion dated 19 October 2023 seeking interim orders restraining the respondent, a church minister, from interfering with church programmes, premises and the newly posted minister of the Delta Circuit in Singwaya Synod, and compelling her to vacate the minister's office and residence following her transfer to Kangeta Circuit in Nyambene Synod by letter dated 1 August 2023. The respondent opposed, alleging the transfer preceded the Conference sitting, was issued while she was expectant, and was discriminatory on grounds of gender and health. The court held her Replying Affidavit invalid as it was undated and unsigned by the Commissioner for Oaths, offending the Oaths and Declarations Act, a defect not curable under Article 159; citing the Supreme Court in Konchellah v Sunkuli, the affidavit was deemed non-existent, leaving the application effectively unopposed. On the merits, the court held transfer and deployment are management prerogatives interfered with only in exceptional circumstances, and that suspension pending disciplinary action is lawful but must be concluded within a reasonable time. The court granted the interim orders, directing the respondent to vacate the office and residence and hand over church property with immediate effect, failing which police assistance may be sought at her costs, awarded costs to the claimants, extended time to file a response by 14 days, and set mention for 5 June 2024. Judgment delivered at Malindi on 16 May 2024 by M. Mbarũ, J.

Key legal issues

#
01

Validity of the respondent's Replying Affidavit

Holding

The Replying Affidavit is invalid for being undated and unsigned by the Commissioner for Oaths, offending the Oaths and Statutory Declarations Act; the defect cannot be cured under Article 159

Reasoning

Section 5 of the Oaths and Declarations Act requires the commissioner to state the place and date the affidavit is taken. The respondent's affidavit was undated and the commissioner had not signed it. Counsel was alerted in open court on 22 April 2024 but did not regularise it. Following the Supreme Court's decision in Konchellah v Sunkuli, such an affidavit is fatally defective and deemed nonexistent, leaving the application effectively unopposed.

p. 4
02

Lawfulness of the respondent's transfer

Holding

Transfer is an employer's operational prerogative; the respondent's defiance without good cause amounts to insubordination

Reasoning

Relying on Toroitich, Kimani and Luyali, the court held that subject to sufficient notice an employee must take lawful directions of the employer. The respondent's claims of malice, pregnancy and discrimination were unsubstantiated absent a valid reply; discrimination allegations require evidence with particulars. Failure to obey a lawful direction under Section 44(4) of the Employment Act would amount to gross misconduct.

p. 5
03

Lawfulness of the suspension

Holding

Suspension pending disciplinary action is lawful and procedural, but the employer must conclude the process expeditiously

Reasoning

Citing Kurgat and Mutwol, the court held there need be no contractual provision for suspension and it enables meaningful investigation. However, citing Omwoyo, Mutiso and Ng'ang'a, prolonged suspension causes anxiety and is unreasonable; the claimants were directed to expedite the disciplinary process within a reasonable time.

p. 7

Legal principles established

#
  • An affidavit that is undated and unsigned by the Commissioner for Oaths is invalid and of no legal value
  • Transfer and deployment of staff is a management prerogative which the court will interfere with only in rare and exceptional circumstances
  • A suspension pending disciplinary proceedings is procedural, but an employer must conclude disciplinary proceedings within a reasonable time

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Restraining the respondent, her associates, servants, followers, sympathizers or any person acting on her behest from interfering with church programmes, buildings, premises, services, inciting members, conducting church services in the Delta Circuit or preaching against church leaders
  2. 2.The respondent to vacate the claimant's office and residence and hand over any property of the Methodist Church in Kenya Delta Circuit in Singwaya Synod with immediate effect
  3. 3.The respondent to cease her duties, occupation or possession of claimant's property and to stop preventing the new minister from carrying out his duties or withholding office equipment
  4. 4.Where the respondent fails to comply within seven days, the claimants to seek the services of the police Coast region, County Commanders Lamu and Tana River to enforce compliance at the full costs of the respondent
  5. 5.Costs of the application awarded to the claimant
  6. 6.Time to file a response to the claim extended by 14 days
  7. 7.Mention for hearing directions on 5 June 2024

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Oaths and Declaration ActSection 5
  • Employment ActSections 29, 34, 44(4)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159

Cases cited (10)

  • Gideon Sitelu Konchellah v Julius Lekakeny Ole Sunkuli & 2 others
    (2018) eKLR
  • Moses Kirui Toroitich v County Secretary, County Government of Baringo & 2 others
    [2021] eKLR
  • Anne Wairimu Kimani v Kenya Agricultural Livestock Research Organisation (KALRO)
    [2017] eKLR
  • Severine Luyali v Ministry of Foreign Affairs & International Trade & 3 others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Elizabeth Cherono Kurgat v Kenya Literature Bureau
    [2014] eKLR
  • Mutwol v Moi University
    (Civil Appeal 118 of 2019) [2022] KECA 537 (KLR) (28 April 2022)
  • Nancy Mwongera v Board of Governors, Salvation Army Thika High School for the Visually Challenged Persons
    [2010] eKLR
  • Samson Omwoyo v Maasai Mara University & another
    Cause No 2367 of 2016
  • Victor Sammy Mutiso v TSC
    [2016] eKLR
  • Peter Gaitho Ng'ang'a v Board of Management Banita School and another
    [2015] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Not stated in judgment (Employment and Labour Relations Court, interim application within a claim)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Methodist Church in Kenya Trustees Registered & another v Maso (Cause E005 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 1424 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1424/eng@2024-05-16

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