Mwangi v Kenya Revenue Authority (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 148 of 2019) [2024] KEELRC 1792 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that Kenya Revenue Authority unfairly dismissed its driver after a six-year disciplinary delay, awarding him over Kshs. 1.6 million.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Valid reason and fair procedure for termination
The termination was substantively and procedurally unfair: the respondent failed to conclude the disciplinary process within six months, failed to avail essential documents, subjected the claimant to double jeopardy, and did not prove approval of termination and appeal by the Commissioner General
The respondent violated its own Rules and Regulations Governing Discipline and Grievances by keeping the claimant on interdiction for over six years, failing to supply documents necessary for his defence, running two disciplinary processes without explaining the fault in the first, and dismissing the appeal without a hearing as a review before the same committee. This breached sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act and Articles 41 and 47 of the Constitution, constituting unfair labour practice.
Remedies
Claimant awarded one month's salary in lieu of notice, maximum 12 months' compensation, arrear half salary for the interdiction period, pension, interest and costs
Following the Supreme Court in Kenfreight EA Limited v Benson K Nguti, the court exercised its discretion under section 49 of the Employment Act, considering the six years of unlawful half-pay interdiction, non-payment of terminal benefits and pension, the claimant's clean record of 11 years and lack of contribution to the dismissal. Reinstatement was refused as time-barred.
Legal principles established
#- An inordinate delay of six years in determining a disciplinary case against an employee on interdiction is a gross violation of the right to fair administrative action under Article 47(1) of the Constitution read with section 4 of the Fair Administrative Action Act, 2015
- Subjecting an employee to two disciplinary processes without availing the proceedings and recommendations of the first violates the principle of legality and amounts to double jeopardy
- Reinstatement under section 12(3)(vi) of the ELRC Act is only available within three years of dismissal
Court orders
#- 1.Kshs. 51,000/= in lieu of notice
- 2.Kshs. 612,000/= in compensation (maximum 12 months' salary under section 49 of the Employment Act)
- 3.Kshs. 943,500/= arrear salary (unpaid half salary for 37 months of interdiction)
- 4.Pension due and payable for the period 2007 to 11/8/2018, to be computed by the respondent within 30 days and filed for approval
- 5.Interest at court rates from date of interdiction till payment in full for item (c), and from date of judgment on items (a), (b) and (d) till payment in full
- 6.Costs of the suit to the claimant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, No. 18 of 2014; Employment Act, 2007
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Munyi v Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (Cause E146 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2487 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 2487 (KLR)19 Sept 2025
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mwangi v Kenya Revenue Authority (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 148 of 2019) [2024] KEELRC 1792 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1792/eng@2024-07-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.