Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissed· [2024] KEELRC 1507 (KLR)

Mfundi v Micro and Small Enterprises Authority (Cause E507 of 2020) [2024] KEELRC 1507 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
14 June 2024
JRJames Rika
3,295 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~13 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court dismissed a KShs. 33 million unfair termination claim, ruling the employer acted fairly after discovering falsified academic credentials.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, employed as Director of MSE Strategy, Planning and Coordination by the Respondent Authority pursuant to a letter dated 10th July 2019, was dismissed on 24th January 2020 on the ground that he had falsified academic certificates, specifically two Bachelor of Arts Degree Certificates allegedly from the University of Nairobi. He sued for declarations of unfair termination and defamation, Kshs. 33,119,795 in terminal dues and compensation, damages, interest and costs. The Respondent maintained the certificates were forgeries confirmed by the issuing institutions. The Court framed three issues: validity of grounds, fairness of procedure, and remedies. It found the two degree certificates were fake, as confirmed by the University of Nairobi and the EACC, but the origin of the certificates in the Respondent's custody was unestablished, since the Claimant never mentioned them in his job application or CV. However, the Claimant's self-declaration under oath before the EACC that he held a Bachelor's Degree was inconsistent with his application, giving the employer genuine grounds to suspect misrepresentation. Under Section 43 of the Employment Act an employer need only show genuine belief in the reasons for termination, not the conclusion of criminal investigations. Procedure was fair: show cause letter, response, and disciplinary hearing. The Court also dismissed the Respondent's late application to introduce fresh documents as an abuse of process, with no order on costs. The claim was declined in its entirety, with costs to the Respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Validity of grounds for termination

Holding

Valid grounds existed under Sections 43 and 44(4)(g) Employment Act and the HR Manual

Reasoning

The certificates were fake (confirmed by University of Nairobi and EACC). Though the claimant denied presenting them, he self-declared under oath holding a Bachelor's Degree, inconsistent with his application and CV, giving the employer genuine reason to suspect misrepresentation. Section 43 requires only a genuine belief in the reasons at termination, not conclusion of EACC or criminal investigations.

p. 6
02

Procedural fairness of termination

Holding

Procedure was fair

Reasoning

The claimant was issued a letter to show cause, replied, and was heard by the Human Resource Committee before dismissal. Disciplinary action conformed with clause 10.23 of the HR Manual, which expands gross misconduct under Section 44(4) to cover false statements and dishonesty.

p. 7
03

Remedies

Holding

No remedies granted; the claim was declined

Reasoning

The claimant worked barely a month and rendered no public service of note before dismissal. His claim of Kshs. 33.1 million was a cash-grab mentality deplored in unfair termination claims. Terminal dues had been paid, and compensation was unjustified.

p. 7
04

Late application to introduce fresh documents

Holding

Dismissed as an abuse of process

Reasoning

The application was filed after both parties had given evidence, hearing closed, submissions made, and a judgment date sought. It was an abuse of the court's process.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Under Section 43 of the Employment Act an employer need only show a genuine belief in the reasons for termination at the time of termination
  • Institutions offering diploma courses cannot determine that their diplomas are equivalent to or higher than university degrees

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application filed by the Respondent dated 16th November 2023 dismissed, with no order on the costs
  2. 2.Delivery of Judgment to proceed on notice as intended before the filing of the Respondent's belated application
  3. 3.The Claim is declined
  4. 4.Costs to the Respondent
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act (first-instance employment claim)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mfundi v Micro and Small Enterprises Authority (Cause E507 of 2020) [2024] KEELRC 1507 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1507/eng@2024-06-14

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