Soni v Patel & 2 others (As Office Bearers of the Board of Management of the Pandya Ndmorial Society) (Cause E114 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 1953 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenyan employers cannot terminate staff by merely serving contractual notice; courts still demand valid reasons and fair procedure, or compensation will follow.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the chief administrator's contract extension binds the respondents
The extension is binding; all contracts from 2017 to 2022 were signed by the chief administrator and the respondents are liable for his acts within the scope of employment
The respondents' assertion that the chief administrator lacked authority to issue the extension was left bare. Every contract from the first dated 15 August 2017 to the last extension dated 15 December 2022 was issued under the chief administrator's hand. The supervisor Dr Naji gave an unchallenged recommendation for the extension. The employer bears liability for its officer's acts done in the course of duty, even if wrongful.
Whether termination by contractual notice without reasons is lawful
No - termination requires both a valid reason and fair procedure under Sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act, notwithstanding a notice clause
Section 35(1) must be read in whole with the rest of the Act. Termination without valid reason relating to conduct, capacity or compatibility, or operational requirements, and without fair procedure, is substantively and procedurally unfair. The respondents revoked the extension citing a policy revision without giving a reason tied to the employee.
Quantum of compensation and leave pay
Compensation of 9 months' gross salary (Kshs. 2,988,684) awarded as sufficient; leave pay for 33 days over 18 months (Kshs. 337,750.60) awarded based on last salary in the absence of employer leave records
Under Section 49 the court exercises discretion on remedies. The claimant would have worked 9 more months; he has mitigated by moving to a less remunerated venture. On leave, under Section 28(4) leave cannot accumulate beyond 18 months; the respondents produced no leave records, so 33 days were computed on the last basic pay.
Sub judice objection
Objection abandoned; a withdrawn suit ceases to exist and costs awarded therein are pursued separately
The respondents raised the prior withdrawn suit Mombasa ELRC No. E045 of 2023 but did not address the issue at hearing or in submissions, so the court deemed it abandoned. Withdrawal ends the suit and any costs are pursued under that cause.
Legal principles established
#- Even where an employment contract allows termination upon notice, the employer must still give valid reasons before terminating; a termination without valid reasons is substantively unfair under Sections 43 and 45 of the Employment Act
- An employer is liable for the commitments undertaken by its employees in the course of employment; a defence that an officer lacked authority does not avail the employer against a third party employee
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that employment was terminated unfairly
- 2.Compensation awarded at Kshs. 2,988,684
- 3.Leave pay Kshs. 337,750.60
- 4.Costs of the suit to the claimant
- 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, "Soni v Patel & 2 others (As Office Bearers of the Board of Management of the Pandya Ndmorial Society) (Cause E114 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 1953 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Mombasa ELRC (not fully stated in judgment text). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1953/eng@2024-07-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.