Komu v Standard Chartered Bank Kenya Limited (Cause E192 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 1839 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court upheld Standard Chartered's dismissal of its security head, ruling that sending confidential documents to his own company was valid grounds for termination.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity and fairness of reasons for termination under Sections 43 and 45(2)(a) and (b) of the Employment Act
Two of the four grounds (failure to ensure proper process in procuring staff access cards without a contract, and forwarding confidential Bank documents to his own company Sealmark) were valid and fair reasons; the CCTV cameras and BGB report grounds were not
The contract specifications named no preferred camera brand and the alleged Group Security CVMS Specifications were not exhibited. The BGB report lacked independence, a concern the Claimant had raised two years earlier regarding the NDA. However, the Claimant admitted printing access cards without a contract and admitted sending confidential Bank documents from his official email to his own company, breaching his contract and the Group Information and Cyber Security Policy.
Procedural fairness under Sections 41 and 45(2)(c) of the Employment Act
The disciplinary process was procedurally fair despite the absence of a separate show cause letter and the mutation of grounds between suspension and dismissal
The suspension letter expressly stated it was not a disciplinary action and reserved the right to add further issues. The disciplinary notification set out the allegations in detail, the Claimant was heard orally, responses were minuted, and he exercised a right of appeal before a differently constituted panel. This satisfied the spirit of Section 41.
Entitlement to reliefs including constitutional damages
The Claimant was not entitled to any of the prayers sought since the dismissal was neither unfair nor unlawful
Having found valid reasons (partially) and fair procedure, the claim for declarations, twelve months' salary, service pay, constitutional damages and general damages could not stand. The suit was dismissed in its entirety with each party bearing its own costs.
Legal principles established
#- The standard of proof in employment termination cases is on a balance of probability, and the employer need only prove reasons it genuinely believed to exist
- Suspension is a right available to an employer on reasonable grounds to enable further investigation and is not a disciplinary action nor an assumption of guilt
- Failure to issue a separate notice to show cause does not invalidate a disciplinary process where the employee was notified in detail of the allegations and given an opportunity to be heard
Court orders
#- 1.Dismissal of the Claim in its entirety
- 2.Each party to bear its own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes under the Employment Act and Constitution (Articles 41 and 47 invoked)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Komu v Standard Chartered Bank Kenya Limited (Cause E192 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 1839 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in judgment (Statement of Claim dated 25th February 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1839/eng@2024-07-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.